OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT PREVIEW
FAITH POWER AND TRUTH HOLY WARS
Skip to Holy Wars Wiki
Holy Wars Wiki · Evidence, context & connections

Holy Wars Wiki

Explore the real-world questions that inform the characters, stories, and game. Follow the evidence, understand its limits, and see where fiction begins.

130 research dossiers · Linked characters & cards · Growing archive

Search the WikiExplore themes

Choose your way into the Wiki.

Faith pairingsCompare a faith with another faith or belief.Belief pairingsExplore political and social convictions.TopicsFind the research behind people, technology and events.

These grids are an index, not a score or a judgment. Each linked comparison keeps its evidence limits and unanswered questions.

Faith pairings and foundations

Choose a row and a column. On a phone, scroll the grid sideways, or use the lists below.

Christianity foundationIslam foundationJudaism foundationHinduism foundationBuddhism foundation
CompareChristianityIslamJudaismHinduismBuddhismNon-PoliticalAnarchistConservativeLiberalSocialistPro-LifePro-ChoiceLGBTQ+Social JusticeTraditional Values
Christianity—Read Christianity and IslamRead Christianity and JudaismRead Christianity and HinduismRead Christianity and BuddhismRead Christianity and Non-PoliticalRead Christianity and AnarchistRead Christianity and ConservativeRead Christianity and LiberalRead Christianity and SocialistRead Christianity and Pro-LifeRead Christianity and Pro-ChoiceRead Christianity and LGBTQ+Read Christianity and Social JusticeRead Christianity and Traditional Values
IslamRead Islam and Christianity—Read Islam and JudaismRead Islam and HinduismRead Islam and BuddhismRead Islam and Non-PoliticalRead Islam and AnarchistRead Islam and ConservativeRead Islam and LiberalRead Islam and SocialistRead Islam and Pro-LifeRead Islam and Pro-ChoiceRead Islam and LGBTQ+Read Islam and Social JusticeRead Islam and Traditional Values
JudaismRead Judaism and ChristianityRead Judaism and Islam—Read Judaism and HinduismRead Judaism and BuddhismNot publishedRead Judaism and AnarchistRead Judaism and ConservativeRead Judaism and LiberalRead Judaism and SocialistRead Judaism and Pro-LifeRead Judaism and Pro-ChoiceRead Judaism and LGBTQ+Read Judaism and Social JusticeRead Judaism and Traditional Values
HinduismRead Hinduism and ChristianityRead Hinduism and IslamRead Hinduism and Judaism—Read Hinduism and BuddhismRead Hinduism and Non-PoliticalRead Hinduism and AnarchistRead Hinduism and ConservativeRead Hinduism and LiberalRead Hinduism and SocialistRead Hinduism and Pro-LifeRead Hinduism and Pro-ChoiceRead Hinduism and LGBTQ+Read Hinduism and Social JusticeRead Hinduism and Traditional Values
BuddhismRead Buddhism and ChristianityRead Buddhism and IslamRead Buddhism and JudaismRead Buddhism and Hinduism—Read Buddhism and Non-PoliticalRead Buddhism and AnarchistRead Buddhism and ConservativeRead Buddhism and LiberalRead Buddhism and SocialistRead Buddhism and Pro-LifeRead Buddhism and Pro-ChoiceRead Buddhism and LGBTQ+Read Buddhism and Social JusticeRead Buddhism and Traditional Values
Christianity: all comparisons
Islam: all comparisons
Judaism: all comparisons
Hinduism: all comparisons
Buddhism: all comparisons
Political and social belief pairings

Choose two convictions. Faith comparisons appear in the Faith pairings section.

CompareNon-PoliticalAnarchistConservativeLiberalSocialistPro-LifePro-ChoiceLGBTQ+Social JusticeTraditional Values
Non-Political—Read Non-Political and AnarchistRead Non-Political and ConservativeRead Non-Political and LiberalRead Non-Political and SocialistRead Non-Political and Pro-LifeRead Non-Political and Pro-ChoiceRead Non-Political and LGBTQ+Read Non-Political and Social JusticeRead Non-Political and Traditional Values
AnarchistRead Anarchist and Non-Political—Read Anarchist and ConservativeRead Anarchist and LiberalRead Anarchist and SocialistRead Anarchist and Pro-LifeRead Anarchist and Pro-ChoiceRead Anarchist and LGBTQ+Read Anarchist and Social JusticeRead Anarchist and Traditional Values
ConservativeRead Conservative and Non-PoliticalRead Conservative and Anarchist—Read Conservative and LiberalRead Conservative and SocialistRead Conservative and Pro-LifeRead Conservative and Pro-ChoiceRead Conservative and LGBTQ+Read Conservative and Social JusticeRead Conservative and Traditional Values
LiberalRead Liberal and Non-PoliticalRead Liberal and AnarchistRead Liberal and Conservative—Read Liberal and SocialistRead Liberal and Pro-LifeRead Liberal and Pro-ChoiceRead Liberal and LGBTQ+Read Liberal and Social JusticeRead Liberal and Traditional Values
SocialistRead Socialist and Non-PoliticalRead Socialist and AnarchistRead Socialist and ConservativeRead Socialist and Liberal—Read Socialist and Pro-LifeRead Socialist and Pro-ChoiceRead Socialist and LGBTQ+Read Socialist and Social JusticeRead Socialist and Traditional Values
Pro-LifeRead Pro-Life and Non-PoliticalRead Pro-Life and AnarchistRead Pro-Life and ConservativeRead Pro-Life and LiberalRead Pro-Life and Socialist—Read Pro-Life and Pro-ChoiceRead Pro-Life and LGBTQ+Read Pro-Life and Social JusticeRead Pro-Life and Traditional Values
Pro-ChoiceRead Pro-Choice and Non-PoliticalRead Pro-Choice and AnarchistRead Pro-Choice and ConservativeRead Pro-Choice and LiberalRead Pro-Choice and SocialistRead Pro-Choice and Pro-Life—Read Pro-Choice and LGBTQ+Read Pro-Choice and Social JusticeRead Pro-Choice and Traditional Values
LGBTQ+Read LGBTQ+ and Non-PoliticalRead LGBTQ+ and AnarchistRead LGBTQ+ and ConservativeRead LGBTQ+ and LiberalRead LGBTQ+ and SocialistRead LGBTQ+ and Pro-LifeRead LGBTQ+ and Pro-Choice—Read LGBTQ+ and Social JusticeRead LGBTQ+ and Traditional Values
Social JusticeRead Social Justice and Non-PoliticalRead Social Justice and AnarchistRead Social Justice and ConservativeRead Social Justice and LiberalRead Social Justice and SocialistRead Social Justice and Pro-LifeRead Social Justice and Pro-ChoiceRead Social Justice and LGBTQ+—Read Social Justice and Traditional Values
Traditional ValuesRead Traditional Values and Non-PoliticalRead Traditional Values and AnarchistRead Traditional Values and ConservativeRead Traditional Values and LiberalRead Traditional Values and SocialistRead Traditional Values and Pro-LifeRead Traditional Values and Pro-ChoiceRead Traditional Values and LGBTQ+Read Traditional Values and Social Justice—
Non-Political: all comparisons
Anarchist: all comparisons
Conservative: all comparisons
Liberal: all comparisons
Socialist: all comparisons
Pro-Life: all comparisons
Pro-Choice: all comparisons
LGBTQ+: all comparisons
Social Justice: all comparisons
Traditional Values: all comparisons
Topics and foundational research

Emergency response

The human mind

Faith & theology

Society & belief

AI & technology

History & ethics

Search all 130 dossiers
A connected research archive

Two ways to explore

Start with the game world

Meet a character or explore a card, then follow its research tags to the real-world subjects behind it.

Browse characters & cards

Start with a real-world topic

Explore a subject by theme. Each dossier will separate findings from fiction and show where the topic appears in Holy Wars.

Browse research themes
Reading the evidence

What the research statuses mean

Supported means the inspected evidence supports the stated claim within its limits. Partly supported means only part is established. Pending verification means the claim or source still needs checking.

No suitable example established in this research pass means sources were searched, but this pass did not establish an example meeting the section’s definitions and evidence requirements. It does not mean no example exists or that every source has been searched.

The record should identify the sources or searches checked, review date, and why candidates did not qualify. Missing search details are disclosed. This is an evidence status, not an additional type of interaction or a finding that a belief is false. A research pass can end with open gaps; publication and completion of the full comparison remain separate decisions.

Find a research dossier

Search this research collection by topic or keyword, or narrow your search to a theme.

130 research dossiers are available. Search by keyword or choose a theme.

Browse by theme

Questions worth exploring

These themes provide a starting structure. Reviewed topics will be added as the collection grows.

3 dossiers available

Emergency Response

Firefighting, rescue, professional demands, and responder experiences.

Browse this theme
7 dossiers available

The Human Mind

Psychology, perception, memory, behavior, and lived experience.

Browse this theme
48 dossiers available

Faith & Theology

Religious beliefs, traditions, sacred texts, and theological questions.

Browse this theme
68 dossiers available

Society & Belief

Political ideas, social groups, institutions, and the beliefs that shape communities.

Browse this theme
3 dossiers available

AI & Technology

Artificial intelligence, computing, emerging technology, and their limits.

Browse this theme
1 dossier available

History & Ethics

Historical context, moral questions, and decisions with human consequences.

Browse this theme
Browse by lore

From the game to the research

Start with a character or card. Holy Wars Wiki links on its page lead back to the shared topic dossier.

Sparkles Rebellion

Sparkles Rebellion

Character · Research pending

Explore proposed research connections; dedicated dossiers remain in preparation.

Christianity

Christianity

Conviction · Foundational dossier

Read the sources, interpretation limits, and connection to the conviction card.

Inside each dossier

Each reviewed dossier will include an eight-part brief: research question, overview, supported findings, disagreements and limits, connection to Holy Wars, where fiction begins, sources, and research/review dates.

The evidence

A readable overview, findings, and linked sources, with meaningful disagreements and unanswered questions made clear.

Connected characters & cards

A visual “Found In-Game” collection explains each connection. Related research links let you follow a subject further, while fiction and speculation remain clearly identified.

The research record

A downloadable PDF, research and review dates, and revision notes when an entry changes.

This collection is being developed by William Byrd with AI assistance in research and organization. Sources and limitations will be visible in each published dossier. A fictional character’s beliefs or actions do not represent an entire real-world community.

Browse the complete dossier catalogue (130)
The research collection

Open a dossier

Dossier 92 · Society & Belief

Liberal ↔ Social Justice: Conduct & Evidence Gaps

On May 22, 2012, Nick Clegg publicly endorsed the Sutton Trust’s social-mobility advocacy and advocated addressing class-linked educational barriers. This is public endorsement and structural-equity advocacy, not an established grant, joint project or successful reduction of inequality. His qualification that redistribution alone does not secure mobility is retained. Separate civil-liberties advocacy supports substantive liberal actor fit. Five directions pending.

Read dossier →
Dossier 93 · Society & Belief

Liberal ↔ Pro-Choice: Conduct & Evidence Gaps

On March 13, 2017, Nick Clegg voted Aye on Diana Johnson’s motion for leave to introduce the Reproductive Health (Access to Terminations) Bill. This is procedural support for a named abortion-decriminalisation initiative, not enactment or approval of every provision. Clegg is not described as a listed presenter or sponsor. Separate civil-liberties advocacy supports liberal actor fit; official vote records describe one event. Five directions pending.

Read dossier →
Dossier 94 · Society & Belief

Socialist ↔ Pro-Life: Conduct & Evidence Gaps

On December 14, 1989, Longford publicly supported Norfolk’s amendment to postpone second reading of an abortion bill, arguing that it would widen access. This establishes public support for the named restrictive intervention; competing interpretations remain attributed, and no verified individual vote or outcome is retained. His discussion of exceptions is preserved. Separate public-ownership advocacy supports socialist actor fit with mixed-economy qualifications. Five directions pending.

Read dossier →
Dossier 95 · Society & Belief

Socialist ↔ LGBTQ+: Conduct & Evidence Gaps

DSA’s May 2017 published statement explicitly advocated LGBTQIA+ rights protections. This is institutional public advocacy, not verified implementation, working-group formation, completed collaboration or reciprocal endorsement. The displayed 2017 wording is distinguished from adoption in November 2011. Separate ownership and democratic-planning principles support socialist actor fit while preserving regulated markets and internal pluralism. Five directions pending.

Read dossier →