Module talk:Infobox military conflict/Archive 5

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Proxy conflicts and diplomatic disputes

I spend too much time explaining to bored college kids with this bizarre flagicon fetish that this template is not suitable for topics like 2017–18 Qatar diplomatic crisis and Iran–Saudi Arabia proxy conflict among others. My main issue with it is that almost every time you have this infobox in such articles, there will be a great deal of original research involved. It took me some time to illustrate this point on the Qatar crisis article and I was only successful because other well-established editors seemed to be in agreement with me. But I don't plan on doing this everywhere. The reason I'm saying it's not suitable for those topics is because nowhere on /doc are the words "diplomatic" and "proxy" mentioned. Thing is, I do want them mentioned, but along the lines of: "This template is not suitable for articles dealing with proxy conflicts and diplomatic disputes." I would also like to have friendly fire incidents (e.g. USS Liberty incident and 2011 NATO attack in Pakistan) included in the wording, but I can leave this for another discussion if it's too controversial right now. Should I convert this to an RfC? Fitzcarmalan (talk) 14:30, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Ordering of campaign boxes

Is there a preferred order for campaign boxes when there are several? Eg see Battle of Neville's Cross. The example in the template page lists the more "junior" conflict first. Neville's Cross reverses this. Is there a preference? Or can one freely choose? Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 20:05, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

Casualties and losses

I've added "and equipment losses" to the description for the "casualties" field to match current practice. The templatedata should probably be updated too. See discussions:

• Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history#RFC: What details should be included in Vietnam War infobox casualties section?
• Module talk:Infobox military conflict/Archive 3#Casualties and losses
• Module talk:Infobox military conflict/Archive 2#Equipment losses

Kendall-K1 (talk) 15:02, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

I have tweaked this a little and added some guidance re listing equipment losses per the first of the discussions listed. I have also updated the "template data" section to mirror the edits made to the "parameters" section. Regards, Cinderella157 (talk) 22:55, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

Edit template

The "map_caption" parameter is not in line with MOS:ACCESS#Text / MOS:FONTSIZE, which say to "avoid using smaller font sizes in elements that already use a smaller font size, such as infoboxes, navboxes and reference sections." It clearly produces a smaller than acceptable font. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:00, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

Muboshgu, The processing for that looks to be carried out by Module:Location map line 228 which would probably have knock-on effects elsewhere, on over half a million pages. *Gulp* Cabayi (talk) 12:07, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

Cabayi, gulp indeed. Thanks for identifying the source for me. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:18, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

Edit request: remove center tag

Request to copy my changes from the sandbox (permalink). This edit removes the center tag around the location map which is obsolete, and in fact redundant to the float = 'center' passed to Module:Location map. An example of usage is at my sandbox, copied from Skirmish at Hunter's Farm. Many thanks, User:GKFX^talk 20:25, 9 May 2019 (UTC).

 Done — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:25, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Guidance/Dispute on using the "result" field

There is currently an ongoing discussion at Talk:Battle_of_Dien_Bien_Phu#Infobox, between me and User:Eastfarthingan. The discussion is about this edit, which removed the "decisive" qualifier and detailed results of the battle. I think the question is wether one would rather follow the infobox guidance (which discourages "decisive") or the local consensus (which, until now, was to keep the status quo because the battle was decisive). I have agreed with User:Eastfarthingan to take the matter here to get some input from the broader community. Averell (talk) 18:23, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

This would be the venue to discuss the template guidance generally, and I don't think it's appropriate to try and settle specific cases such as Dien Bien Phu here. If normal discussion at the article TP does not succeed in establishing a consensus, then an RfC there is probably the next step. Factotem (talk) 18:42, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

Edit request: Mobile friendly version of this template

Please replace

			:addClass('mw-stack mobile-float-reset')
			:css('box-sizing', 'border-box')
			:css('float', 'right')
			:css('clear', 'right')

with

			:addClass('mw-stack desktop-float-right')

The styles have been moved to https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Infobox_military_conflict/styles.css

See phab:T221695 for more information. Jdlrobson (talk) 21:40, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

@MSGJ: @Jonesey95: @Frietjes: can any of you help me with this change? Jdlrobson (talk) 21:42, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Jdlrobson, okay, but I moved the templatestyles to the module. Frietjes (talk) 21:54, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

stray carriage return?

When implemented, why is there a gap between |place= and |coordinates=? — Fourthords | =Λ= | 18:33, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

Can we please make sure that from now on display coordinates are shown as 'INLINE' only. 'TITLE' use is now redundant especially on mobile and tablet formats/browsers.

• Example:38°06′35.0″N 15°38′31.3″E

coord|38|06|35.0|N|15|38|31.3|E|type:event_scale:10000_region:IT|display=inline

Regards. Eastfarthingan (talk) 15:55, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks I've amended my template. Keith-264 (talk) 19:59, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Bug involving the creation of an extra blank line

In the infobox of the Siege of Najaf (1918), there is a blank line between "Location: Najaf" and "Result: British victory". This does not happen in Afghan tribal revolts of 1944–1947. I am confident that this is a bug and should be fixed. Koopinator (talk) 07:38, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

Number of belligerents

I think we should have a serious discussion on whether to have four columns for belligerents because of how it is used in Template:Syrian Civil War infobox and the Mexican Drug War. In the case of the former, the infobox is too wide and negatively affects the lead in Syrian Civil War; in the case of the latter, the infobox is too narrow and usually only one word can be fit in each line for the belligerents. Jay Coop · Talk · Contributions 22:14, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

I think it works in the latter case, but not in the former. I don't think deprecating four columns is necessary, just that the infobox must not be so wide. That is a formatting issue, surely? Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 04:53, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

Well, the question becomes: how do you balance having four columns while not negatively impacting the formatting? Jay Coop · Talk · Contributions 07:19, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

Some uses of the infobox have resolved this by not using all four columns and instead listing information both side by side and in a few columns. See e.g. Second Congo War. The larger issue is why people are trying to cram all sorts of minutiae in the infobox that doesn't appear in the article. Template:Syrian Civil War infobox has more than a hundred references, when it should be based on what's already sourced in prose. It also includes collapsed lists against the advice at MOS:DONTHIDE (if it's not important enough to be shown, is it really important enough to be included at all?) – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 14:16, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

How to add a historical locator map

I would like to add a historical locator map to battle of Hel, just like you can see on pl:Obrona Helu, but can't figure out the code. Could someone help with that? I should be able to do it myself in the future once I see the working code. TIA! PS. Polish wiki uses the pl:Szablon:Wojna infobox template, if you need the code. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:48, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Piotrus, For best results, create a new location module for Poland 1939, just like we have Module:Location map/data/Germany 1937. I did this myself a while back so I may be able to help. It looks like the plwiki map your are looking for is probably in pl:Kategoria:Szablony map.

You can also hack it (see Leitmeritz concentration camp for an example]]), but a Poland 1939 map would be much more valuable overall. buidhe 00:32, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

@Buidhe: Thanks. I found the maps of Poland user for that purpose on pl wiki here: pl:Moduł:Mapa/dane/Polska. Interesting how this doesn't have an en wiki interwiki? Anyway, I also found we already have Module:Location map/data/Poland 1939. Now, what's the best way of integrating this into this infobox? Or should it be used as a stand-alone box? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 01:55, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

Piotrus, {{Infobox military conflict}} has parameters for adding a location map, which is automatically filled in with coordinates. If that doesn't work, you can try | image_map ={{Location map... as I did at Transport of Białystok children or you can inject {{location map}} and its variants directly into the infobox without a parameter. buidhe 02:00, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

I think I got it to work, thanks! Also ping User: Gog the Mild. See [1]. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:08, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

Piotrus, ah ha! Thanks. (Looks good.) Gog the Mild (talk) 12:48, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 18 June 2020

CSS fix for the above issue. Making a separate request to separate this proposed fix from the issue, in case a different fix is desired.

At a glance the issue looks like one with the MediaWiki parser. The easiest solution seems to be a CSS fix. It applies to the direct first 'p' child of status to avoid any problems, and if any individual templates have a manual 'p' element as the first child and want their own styling (which would be unusual, contextually speaking) that won't cause issues as that would override with specificity.

Updated templates:

• Module:Infobox military conflict/sandbox
• Module:Infobox military conflict/sandbox/styles.css

Test cases

Courtesy reminder to update to use the live styles.css, if you merge this change. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 14:38, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Template ERs somewhat backlogged. Pinging Primefac, Frietjes: can this change be merged into live? ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 12:27, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

okay. Frietjes (talk) 22:53, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 17 June 2020

Invoked with the status argument seems to cause an extra paragraph tag to be output for that status; see "Ongoing" in Indo-Pakistani wars and conflicts and 2020 China–India skirmishes. The extra padding/margin caused by this means misalignment with the "Status" header.

The status should be output without the <p> tag. 89.107.6.24 (talk) 01:13, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Note to template editors: this happens only in certain situations. The Mediawiki parser wraps the word "Ongoing" in <p>...</p> tags when it is followed by a bulleted list, but not when it is alone. Paste and modify the infobox from Indo-Pakistani wars and conflicts into Special:ExpandTemplates to see the HTML output. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:28, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Seems to affect quite a few templates, e.g. Afghanistan conflict (1978–present) ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 14:38, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

okay. Frietjes (talk) 22:54, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Custom argument values

Hello, I reuse this module for viwiki. I would like to use both English and Vietnamese parameters:

• self.args.image and self.args.hình_ảnh // I have a error for "hình_ảnh"

How can use this? Thank you. Alphama (talk) 14:40, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Coordinates

Just a quick ping of User:Eastfarthingan and User:Keith-264 regarding this archived thread establishing a consensus to remove title coordinates from military conflict articles as "redundant". As recently discussed at Template_talk:Coord#Clarification_of_what_"=title"_achieves, there's actually more to the "=title" option than just showing the coordinates of the title on non-mobile devices, although this wasn't well documented: it also establishes the template coordinates as being the single, primary location of the article subject (so that they'll show up on a map by anything that queries the Wikipedia API).

If a project template has been modified to omit title coordinates, you may want to change it back. --Lord Belbury (talk) 14:44, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Oh no....Keith-264 (talk) 15:26, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

So this means I should stop removing 'title' in coord then? Eastfarthingan (talk) 20:38, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

If you think that the coordinates of conflicts should be visible on maps and features that use the API (like Special:Nearby), and if the only reason for removing 'title' was that you thought the coordinates looked redundant: yes, they should stay. The ones you've deleted should be brought back as well, but I don't know what the easiest way to do that would be. WP:AWB should be able to find and fix articles that use this infobox, but don't have a "title" for their coordinates. --Lord Belbury (talk) 17:50, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the information. I will start putting them back. Eastfarthingan (talk) 18:37, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 17 April 2021

Add custom header options for the other sections, and not just for combatants/belligerents Halo FC (talk) 14:36, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

 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)

Hi @Pppery:, 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)

 Done 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)

Documentation Transclusions Readability

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)