Module talk:Infobox military conflict

message: Add custom header options for the other sections, and not just for combatants/belligerents Halo FC (talk) 14:36, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: please make your requested changes to the module's sandbox first; see WP:TESTCASES. * Pppery * it has begun... 16:19, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi , I've made what I thought were the right changes. I next made a custom infobox on my user sandbox page. Though when I previewed my user sandbox page with the edited module, I couldn't see any changes, none of the desired changes, the custom header text, I'm not sure what I need to do, hope you can help out, thanks Halo FC (talk) 18:17, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:   Sorry for the delay in responding, your ping attempt didn't work (pings only work when adding a whole new comment, not editing an existing one, see Help:Fixing failed pings). * Pppery * it has begun... 16:31, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template-protected edit request on 17 April 2021 

message: Are transclusions of other documentation really the preferred practice on the Template:Infobox military conflict/doc page? A glance at the TOC shows three subheadings for "Parameters", and two each for "Usage", "Microformat", "TemplateData" and "See also". The hierarchy of headings offers no further clues either since the names of transcluded pages don't show up there at all. I understand how co-locating this information could be a convenience if you know how the documentation is organized in advance but otherwise using this as a reference tool is cumbersome. There's no clear way to distinguish which section is which without a bunch of scrolling around - at which point it might as well be a click into the actual template documentation being transcluded. --N8 07:57, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Documentation Transclusions Readability 

message: If information on only one belligerent is available and not the second one or strength of second one is only partly available like strength under one of the commanders of second belligerent then how to write in Infobox? Whether remove strength column altogether for both or keep one blank or write N.A. in one? Sajaypal007 (talk) 15:53, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I would need more information (ie a specific case with details) but we don't have to populate the strength fields in the infobox - particularly if there is any nuance to the information that is best left to prose. Cinderella157 (talk) 23:36, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Regarding strength of only one belligerent 

message: See Template talk:Infobox military conflict#Campaignboxes causing infobox to stay above first paragraph. At Battle of Bakhmut (for example) the mobile transform that moves the lead paragraph above the infobox is failing. Moving the campaignbox outside the infobox fixes the issue, so it doesn't seem to be the fault of either the campaignbox template or  but rather the problem lies here somewhere. Hairy Dude (talk) 01:34, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Campaignboxes causing infobox to stay above first paragraph 

message: Please see this test case for an example of the infobox being replaced entirely by a script error when  is used without coordinates. That condition should result in an error-tracking category, not a giant red error message. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:02, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Never mind, I fixed it by adjusting the if statement to check for both map_type and coordinates before rendering a map. Why is this talk page separate from the Template's talk page? That is not the usual practice. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:02, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use of map_type= without coordinates causes script error to display instead of infobox