Template talk:Campaignbox French invasion of Russia

Military history: European / French / Russian & Soviet / Napoleonic era

This template is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

Associated task forces:
/
	European military history task force
	French military history task force
	Russian, Soviet and CIS military history task force
	Napoleonic era task force (c. 1792 – 1815)

Suggestion for improvement

The very complex battle structure of the French Invasion of Russia is not described well in {{Campaignbox French invasion of Russia}} as it is just a plain list of battles sorted by their starting date. Based on a discussion in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history I suggest this new content: Ruedi33a (talk) 16:23, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ruedi33a (talk) 16:25, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have added the existing template for comparison. Cinderella157 (talk) 02:56, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I would note that the contents of the two nav boxes are not identical. This is not just a resorting of the information. Changing the contents as well complicates any discussion by introducing an extra layer of complexity. The discussion would be much more straight forward if it were to focus on one issue - the reordering. I would strongly suggest that the proposal be amended accordingly. Cinderella157 (talk) 03:09, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This type of structure will only work if it reflects the structure of the main article. It isn't. Cinderella157 (talk) 04:28, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have updated my suggestion to meet the requirements. I have migrated the battles 1:1. But now the most helpful ones are shown twice to emphasise the contrast between Napoleon's and Macdonald's and Schwarzenberg's work rate.Ruedi33a (talk) 08:08, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The problem remains that the structure you would impose is not a reflection of the article structure and therefore not particularly helpful. That the "structured" section includes only 8 of the 30 odd battles is also problematic, indicating a weakness in the structure proposed. Of course, the main body is more likely to be engaged than the wings so the point you would try to make is moot. Cinderella157 (talk) 00:23, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot for the construction cooperation. Given the constraints the old version is still the best. No further action intended.Ruedi33a (talk) 06:53, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]