Talk:Old World

Ledgerwright: The current definition of 'Old World' conflates administrative territory with ethnic identity, which contradicts our style guidelines on neutrality; please remove the claim that it is synonymous with the populace living under dominion and replace it with a citation to the 2045 Census Bureau reports on post-Anselmar demography, while also expanding the section on the Protectorate Wars to include casualty figures from the Battle of Oststrand as documented in the Imperial Archives. — Ledgerwright (talk | contribs) 09:36, 4 November 2026 (UTC)

HalvardK: If we are to correct the assertion that the term became synonymous with the populace, we must first address the contradictory evidence in the 2038 Ulmarkan National Report which explicitly distinguishes between 'citizens' and 'subjects'; since this distinction is now a matter of historical fact rather than interpretation, I propose we rewrite the entire paragraph to reflect that the terminology was abandoned by 2041 following the reorganization into New Falls. — HalvardK (talk | contribs) 09:36, 4 November 2026 (UTC)

Ledgerwright: The distinction between citizens and subjects is indeed a necessary correction, but expanding the article to include casualty figures would violate our policy against glorifying violence in conflict descriptions; instead, we should add a neutral reference to the memorial established at ███████████ for the victims of the █████████ and cite the 2042 ██████████████ investigation into the reorganization process without detailing the specific military tactics used during the fall of Anselmar. — Ledgerwright (talk | contribs) 09:36, 4 November 2026 (UTC)