Template talk:Campaignbox

message: &action=edit edit
	
Adding a built-in edit button to the campaignbox is quite simple and makes life easier to editors. Of course, some campaignboxes don't get changed once they're made, but if they do this could come in quite handy. -- Миборовский U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai! 06:10, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Argh! The table on the right is blocking my campaignbox. It's to the bottom right. -- Миборовский U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai! 06:11, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not sure how useful it would be on most of them, since they rarely need editing; and it has the twin problems of (a) breaking the centering of the title and (b) making vandalism easier (almost nobody has the campaignboxes watchlisted). Kirill Lokshin 09:39, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Built-in edit button 

message: The Pulang Lupa link reads 'Pulang Lupal'.
I request an administrator to fix it.
Kguirnela 06:28, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed.  Thanks for catching that! Kirill Lokshin 13:17, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Thanks for the fix and you are welcome! =) Kguirnela 04:33, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Error in The Philippine-American War Campaign Box 

message: The recent reduction in font size is a good thing on large templates with ten battles or more, but it makes some templates look ridiculous. For example, Template:Campaignbox Third Crusade and even Template:Campaignbox Frankish Civil War (715-718), where the title is too large comparatively. Srnec 16:45, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: FWIW, the change ocurred because the base template is now derived from , as part of the effort to standardize navigation template layouts.  Admittedly the smallest cases look a bit strange, but they're pretty much the exception rather than the rule; with our lax standards on article inclusion, even the smallest battles are winding up with articles to be linked, which is causing the vast majority of campaignboxes to grow to a reasonable size. Kirill 17:04, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Text size

message: There needs to be  after the |state= parameter to force a default uncollapsed state and to allow people to choose what state they want each transcluded campaignbox to be. Centy – [reply]• contribs – 15:38, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not quite sure what you mean here.  The template doesn't export a state; it just autocollapses whenever two or more templates are on the same page, as most navigation templates do.  Are you looking to change that on a per-template level, or a per-article one? Kirill 16:23, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Basically if you just put |state= into this template, all campaignboxes will have the default state attribute automatically given to them. But putting |state=, you basically pass on the determination of the state attribute to the actual campaignbox. So you can set the collapsible state for every individual campaignbox, ie. change it from the default setting if you wish, instead of forcing all campaignboxes to have the default setting. Centy – [reply]• contribs – 22:54, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, ok; so you want each individual campaignbox to be able to override the default?  Easy enough to do. Kirill 23:15, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Collapsible option 

message: Could you please add bg:Шаблон:Кампания?Thank you.--Desertus Sagittarius 14:39, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Kirill 15:46, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  bg: 

message: The campaign box seems to be causing text flow issues eg on Second Battle of Ypres and Battle of the Somme, the text does not flow from the top of the article but only from the joint of the campaign box and infobox. Can't see the cause myself, anyone up to determining and correctingGraemeLeggett 21:40, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Text flow issues 

message: You may want to clarify in the article, whether we are using the "Warbox" or "Campaignbox" for military articles.  In addition, an explanation of the differences between each of them.  It is rather confusing. Battlefield 10:39, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Warbox

message: Template:Campaignbox_Axis-Soviet_War is currently subject of an edit conflict between me and Ghirlandajo.  This is because of the unresolved issue of what size battles/operations should be added.  I have made a proposal on the talk page of the campaign box, but this was never discussed to any conclusion. As a result it now appears to me that Ghirlandjo simply reverts any additions to the box, regardless of the size of the battle they refer to. This is not logical, since it leaves the box containing some smaller actions simply because they were added earlier. I would appreciate comments and suggestions. Andreas 15:17, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have to say I'm not surprised. This seems to be his typical behaviour. Albrecht 16:09, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Axis-Soviet War Campaignbox 

message: Is a Vietnam campaignbox necessary? --Brand спойт 10:08, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: One for the Vietnam War?  It would certainly be a good idea; there's a large number of existing articles that would need to be put in chronological order to create it, though. Kirill Lokshin 11:33, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vietnam 

message: Just wondering if anyone had any thoughts on moving the Georgian-Ossetian conflict and the Georgian-Abkhaz conflict out of the Template:Campaignbox Post-Soviet Conflicts in the Caucasus and into an infobox for the Georgian Civil War. It appears that these conflicts are more related to Georgia than to the other conflicts such as Chechnya, etc. Publicus 13:39, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There's no reason we can't have both, of course; there are numerous other cases where a particular battle/war/etc. is listed on mutliple campaignboxes. Kirill Lokshin 15:12, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Georgian Civil War

message: Are all those Russo-Turkish Wars in the right place? Should they not come under the 18th and 19th centuries rather than 15th-17th century? Thanks Raymond Palmer 19:49, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: They're under the 17th century because that's when the "Russo-Turkish Wars" began; all of the series of wars listed here go by the overall start of the conflict.  (I've added the overview campaignbox for the entire conflict, which might make things a bit clearer. It was actually supposed to be added a while ago, but we never got around to it, for some reason.) Kirill Lokshin 19:59, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I see. What about adding Queen Anne's War as part of the War of the Spanish Succession. Also, the Dutch War (Franco-Dutch War) is not part of the Anglo-Dutch Wars. More accuratley,  I think, to describe the Third Anglo-Dutch war as part of the Franco-Dutch War. I hope that makes sense? Raymond Palmer 20:09, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, if there are any actual campaignboxes that need to be moved, please feel free to move them; but some of these wars don't actually have templates. Kirill Lokshin 20:13, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, sorry, I just realised there is no campaignbox for QA war. Raymond Palmer 20:15, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Russo-Turkish Wars

message: Just like to give a head up that at the moment the campaign box is sometimes too small to fit in the header a 'hide' button, the v.d.e links and the name of the war. An example is Template:Campaignbox War of the Austrian Succession. The box looks ugly with the v.d.e and ugly without (when the text is aligned off center). Something needs to be done - maybe make the font smaller? Centy – [reply]• contribs – 12:24, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is a known issue; see WP:MILHIST#NAVPROBLEMS for the needed fix. Kirill 13:34, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  v.d.e Problems 

message: Would it be possible to include a footer / notes section, similar to the "below" section on our military navigation template?  I wouldn't mind using it for brief notes and annotation explanations.
For example, in the Battle of the Mediterranean, roughly half of the activities / operations were supply convoys, while the others indicate prominant engagements.  I'd like to keep them in chronological order while still clearly differentiating them. Oberiko (talk) 15:28, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, it'd be pretty trivial to add another field—this template is merely a special case of  to begin with—but how do you want it to be formatted?  The actual "below" field in the navigation template displays in a rather dark gray, which might be too jarring here given that we don't have the gray bars on the left.  Alternately, we could use the second group field, which would have a much lighter background. Kirill 02:53, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I trust your aesthetics judgement far more then my own Kirill, but I think the exsiting "below" (as seen on Template:Navbox) would work well, and keep our colors fairly standardized. Oberiko (talk) 14:39, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, I've tentatively added a "notes=" parameter; please test it out and let me know whether it'll work for what we need here. Kirill 02:13, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've put it in the Battle of the Mediterranean box and it looks pretty good.  Thanks Kirill. Oberiko (talk) 17:44, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Footer / notes section

message: This campaign box requires a clean-up and I am not prepared to do so without some additional opinions or some form of consensus. The campaign box contains a number of local and, in the big scheme of the western front, small battles. Can someone possible put a proposal on paper.
I have started a discussion at Template talk:Campaignbox Western Front (World War I)
Labattblueboy (talk) 18:42, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I have updated the campaign box --Labattblueboy (talk) 20:32, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Campaignbox Western Front (World War I) 

message: In the article 1887 Constitution of the Kingdom of Hawaii, the campaignbox containing "Hawaiian Revolutions" covers part of the article text in the section "Rebellion of 1887".  I do not know if that is an issue with the Campaignbox template.  The military history style guide does acknowledge some alignment problems caused by the template, but I am unsure if any of the proposed solutions really address this situation.  I am posting here as well as the specific article's discussion page, just to ensure that the template authors are notified.--Rpclod (talk) 13:20, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: This appears to be a rendering issue with variable-width items stacked along one margin of the page; I've rearranged the templates in question to remove it. Kirill [talk] [prof] 15:54, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for addressing the issue so promptly.  Unfortunately it seems as though someone decided to remove the campaignbox from the referenced article, so I cannot confirm that it works there.--Rpclod (talk) 11:53, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Campaignbox covers article text 

message: What is the guideline for chronology in terms of battles & sieges in a campaignbox? Template in question is  Template:Campaignbox Anglo-Spanish War. For example [[Siege of Ostend] started in July 1601 & ended nearly three years later but siege of Kinsale started in October 1601 & ended in January 1602. Since siege of Ostend started first would logic dictate that it should come before Siege of Kinsale? So far all other campaignboxes are done in this way eg. Siege of Malta in WWII. JimRattray (talk) 13:47, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The usual convention, as far as I know, is to order events based on the start date; in your example, Ostend would indeed be placed before Kinsale. Kirill [talk] [prof] 12:31, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Campaignbox chronology? 

message: I am sure it is written somewhere but I have trouble finding it at the moment, what are correct values for "state" parameter?--Staberinde (talk) 11:30, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Same values as in . -- User:Edokter  12:17, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Correct values for "state" parameter 

message: I am trying to use  to have a column of pics opposing a couple of campaign boxes.  But it doesn't float - it always drops to clear of the campaign boxes, even with | clear = false 
Similar happens with trying to link to a paragraph halfway down a campaign box - displayed material starts at end of campaign box, not at paragraph heading.  John of Cromer (talk) mytime= Wed 22:45, wikitime=  14:45, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Do not use  when you have columns on on opposing sides of the page. -- User:Edokter  16:55, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Why not? Isn't that what it's for?  In any case, that's not the issue, because it doesn't work properly per second fault. John of Cromer (talk) mytime= Thu 07:46, wikitime=  23:46, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

text: use  in . Frietjes (talk) 18:55, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks Frietjes – and I didn't even tell you where! John of Cromer (talk) mytime= Thu 07:46, wikitime=  23:46, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other material doesn't float alongside 

message: It is not Manipur but Manupur in the Durrani Empire campaign.
RRD13 দেবজ্যোতি (talk) 06:10, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: – an edit to this template was not needed.  Instead, the campaign box in the Durrani Empire article has been edited to reflect the correct spelling and to turn a red link blue. Be prosperous! Paine  10:01, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template-protected edit request on 21 November 2015 

message: This template is among things that don't work well with a large font size. For instance, use font size 26 (Firefox) or "very large" (Chrome), go to American Revolutionary War, and scroll down to the navbox entitled "American Revolutionary War European & Atlantic Campaigns and theaters". Now click "show" to see the contents. You can't, because the navbox is truncated. Similarly, go to Action of 6 October 1779 and scroll down to the navbox entitled "American Revolutionary War European & Atlantic Waters". You don't have to click "Show", so on the first line click "1st Ushant". 1st what? All it says is "1st" (Chrome) or part of a "1" (Firefox), again because it's truncated. Art LaPella (talk) 22:38, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: the problem is most like due to the use of 'px' units for the width of the box, which is set in Module:WPMILHIST Infobox style.  this is unlike Module:Sidebar and Module:Infobox which use 'em' units.  I would support changing the width there to the same default width as Module:Sidebar and Module:Infobox. Frietjes (talk) 23:41, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

text: , see, for example this thread.  there are others who are complaining, but for other reasons. Frietjes (talk) 23:44, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Font size 

message: Add the class "vertical-navbox" as the first class, before the  param (but make sure to have a space char between them). This makes this template recognisable for other layouts as a vertical sidebar, instead of a bottom dwelling navbox. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 08:53, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: , I added it here. let me know if there are any problems. I don't think there is a simple way to add the class to the outer div container without changes to Module:Navbox. Frietjes (talk) 13:04, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template-protected edit request on 11 July 2019 

message: Wars frequently end up with peace processes and democratic/human-rights-respecting political solutions (some end in dictatorships). There are plenty of WP:RS's for the peace processes, even though they can be harder to find.
How about adding a parameter 'peace process = ', so that this can be more than just a "note" parameter? Boud (talk) 23:27, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposal: peace process parameter 

message: Please create a warning like in :
This template does not display in the mobile view of Wikipedia
Templates using the navbox (navbox) or nomobile (sidebar) classes are not displayed on the mobile web site of English Wikipedia.
Mobile page views account for approximately 62% of all page views (90-day average as of January 2021). Ruedi33a (talk) 16:38, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: The warning that you mention occurs in Template:Navbox/doc; you should be able to copy it to Template:Campaignbox/doc which is not protected. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:29, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Done, thanks a lot for helping me Ruedi33a (talk) 21:04, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposal: add warning about invisibility in mobile view 

message: I think that there might be some cases in which an image that sits atop the content of the expanded campaignbox as useful visual aid. As such, I'd like to include an image field in the template, so that images can be placed into campaignboxes. — Mhawk10 (talk) 01:40, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposal: Add an image field