Template talk:Campaignbox Napoleonic Wars

This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Military history: European / French / 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 Napoleonic era task force (c. 1792 – 1815)

While the pages for the two subjects should certaintly remain separate, I was wondering if the campaignboxes that list all the various coalitions might be merged into a single campaignbox.

• The coalitions are named as one single sequence (not 2nd revolutionary coalition and 1st Napoleonic coalition)
• it provides a nice bridge to span from one period to the other
• the revolutionary wars campaignbox just looks sad with only two entries

As an aid to discussion, I posted two different versions of how this might look as revisions to this template (although we might change the name of the template if we choose to adopt this revision). Please take a look and let me know if it makes sense. The Gomm 05:11, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is probably sensible, but, if we're going to have a combined box, it should also include the other wars tied into the French Revolutionary sequence (e.g. the Gunboat War). As far as the layout is concerned, I don't see any problems with just using a simple sequence, as in your first variant; funny spacing tricks are generally to be avoided, per WP:CAMPAIGN. Kirill Lokshin 05:27, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I tend to agree with you about the 'funny spacing tricks'. The only reason that I gave that option a try was that there is probably some benefit to making some little distinction between the revolutionary and napoleonic coalitions. This spacing trick seemed like the least annoying option for making a distinction while keeping them together. Gomm 06:06, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

It's probably too subtle a distinction to make in a simple navigational template. The conflicts are pretty commonly regarded as an interconnected series (e.g. Great French War), regardless of where sub-divisions may be made; while the breaks between the wars may be a good way to organize articles, trying to present them here isn't really beneficial, in my opinion. Kirill Lokshin 06:13, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is the War of 1812 (Anglo-American War) part of the Napoleonic Wars or a concurrent war? --PBS (talk) 00:37, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Its causes and settlement were rooted in the Napoleonic War, so I think this is reasonable. HMS Vanguard (talk) 08:52, 3 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have added the campaigns which seem to be missing, although they are not wars I have tried to replicate it as much in the same way as The French Revolutionary wars template is set. There may be more additions like the naval campaigns/blockades which were continuous from 1805-14. There is future scope for it as least. Chris Wet 16:21, 16 October 2012 (GMT)