| Forums: War Room → Categories for Guiding Wind and Jasmine Island protectors | 
|
I'd like to propose categories for the Guiding Wind and Jasmine Island protectors groups/organizations. Both of them have played significant parts in the Jasmine Island portions of the rpg, and between the groups themselves and individual characters, both categories would have enough articles to be properly populated. I'd also like to take the opportunity to ask those who have a better grasp of the rpg if there are other group categories that would be similarly populated if they were to be created. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 18:09, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- Support for the creation of categories for the Jasmine Island protectors and Guiding Wind.
As for other categories: Perhaps a category called "Political anarchism" might become useful, as the newest RPG book introduces a new anarchist group called the "Autumn Leaves". The group and its members (namely Isonash, Aputi) don't have articles yet, but they could be grouped together in the category with the Red Lotus. DyingFlameTsui (wall • contribs) 20:30, 8 January 2025 (UTC)- Just anarchism/anarchists would do, though it sounds a bit too tailored. Would a "Revolutionaries" category be a better fit or is that too broad a descriptor that would include too many other groups? Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 14:13, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- That's an interesting idea. However, how do we define "Revolutionaries"? After all, not every rebel group or social movement could be called "revolutionary". Britannica defines it as "a major, sudden, and hence typically violent alteration in government and in related associations and structures", though the Wikipedia definition of "rapid, fundamental transformation of a society's class, state, ethnic or religious structures" seems to better reflect the modern understanding of revolution.
In this sense, the Yellow Necks, Equalists, Earth Empire, Guiding Wind, and Gombo's barbarians are certainly revolutionaries, as we have canonical proof / descriptions of their revolutionary ideology. Yet, what about groups like the New Ozai Society, Fifth Nation, Gilak's forces, and Crimson Sails Armada - these also wanted to bring about rapid change, but we either know much less about their concrete plans and ideologies or they seem not entirely revolutionary (such as by focusing on loot over politics like the Fifth Nation and Crimson Sails Armada or by being reactionary like the New Ozai Society and Gilak). DyingFlameTsui (wall • contribs) 19:46, 11 January 2025 (UTC)- Going by these two definitions, of the groups you mentioned, I think only Fifth Nation and Crimson Sails Armada wouldn't fit well. I'm not sure that being reactionary is an excluding factor. NOS and Gilak both had clear sociopolitical goals. The pirate groups don't really care about creating, destroying, or changing society, the just want riches and prestige. Even CSA's anti-FN activities are mostly based on revenge. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 04:46, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
- That's an interesting idea. However, how do we define "Revolutionaries"? After all, not every rebel group or social movement could be called "revolutionary". Britannica defines it as "a major, sudden, and hence typically violent alteration in government and in related associations and structures", though the Wikipedia definition of "rapid, fundamental transformation of a society's class, state, ethnic or religious structures" seems to better reflect the modern understanding of revolution.
- Just anarchism/anarchists would do, though it sounds a bit too tailored. Would a "Revolutionaries" category be a better fit or is that too broad a descriptor that would include too many other groups? Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 14:13, 10 January 2025 (UTC)