Template talk:Campaignbox Western Front (World War I)

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

Military history: World War I 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: /  World War I task force

I have reduced the number of battles in the campaign box to only those of consequence for the war as a whole. I was unable to consolidate the 2nd Artois/2nd Champagne/Loos joint French-British offensive as no article or quality exists. For the Neville Offensive I have left both Arras & 2nd Aisne articles, as the Arras page is of high quality article and I was unable to find a method to denote that they were a combined effort in the template.

Removed were battles that have POV or are included for national reason. This includes:

• Haelen - is part of Battle of the Frontiers
• Great Retreat - because of POV and focused on 1st Marne.
• Battle of Neuve Chapelle - could be re-added as it was a distinct for the artois offensive
• Hill 70 - predominantly Canadian action, like Vimy Ridge
• Hulluch - was a heavy gas attack but not a major battle
• Mont Sorrel - localized Ypres attack of primarily Canadian importance
• Battle of Vimy Ridge - an article which I have placed a great deal of effort into but recognize was part of the Battle of Arras
• Battle of the Lys - part of Spring Offensive
• Third Battle of the Aisne - part of Spring Offensive
• Battle of Belleau Wood - part of Spring Offensive, likely included because of U.S. Marines involvement
• Battle of Château-Thierry (1918) - part of Spring Offensive
• Battle of Hamel - small battle

Thoughts?

--Labattblueboy (talk) 20:24, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2008-12-06T20:24:00.000Z","author":"Labattblueboy","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Labattblueboy-2008-12-06T20:24:00.000Z-Consolidation","replies":[]}}-->

Yes. According to WP, the Battle of the Frontiers started at August 14. Haelen was on August 12. So should we change the dates on the Frontiers-page, so we can insert Haelen?Jeff5102 (talk) 08:02, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2009-02-26T08:02:00.000Z","author":"Jeff5102","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Jeff5102-2009-02-26T08:02:00.000Z-Consolidation","replies":["c-Labattblueboy-2009-02-26T16:11:00.000Z-Jeff5102-2009-02-26T08:02:00.000Z","c-Labattblueboy-2013-05-13T03:42:00.000Z-Jeff5102-2009-02-26T08:02:00.000Z"]}}-->

I've made the move and put Haelen under the Battle of the Frontiers campaign box. I guess changes over ther would be needed as Mulhouse is even before Haelen Labattblueboy (talk) 16:11, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2009-02-26T16:11:00.000Z","author":"Labattblueboy","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-Labattblueboy-2009-02-26T16:11:00.000Z-Jeff5102-2009-02-26T08:02:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->

• Small campaign box created for 2nd Artois--Labattblueboy (talk) 03:42, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2013-05-13T03:42:00.000Z","author":"Labattblueboy","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-Labattblueboy-2013-05-13T03:42:00.000Z-Jeff5102-2009-02-26T08:02:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->

Any readings I've seen do not note the conflict surrounding Fort Vaux as being a major subsidiary battle of Verdun. Consequently, I don't see it appropriate to include it in the infobox, which is reserved for the most major battles. --Labattblueboy (talk)

I think that when the Verdun article has the German offensive of 1914, the French offensives of late 1916, August 1917 and late 1918 as sub-articles, they can have an infobox and things like Vaux and Douaumont can go in 'Associated articles'. I'll get round to it, one day....Keith-264 (talk) 08:27, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-03-26T08:27:00.000Z","author":"Keith-264","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Keith-264-2016-03-26T08:27:00.000Z-Fort_Vaux","replies":[]}}-->

Yourlocallordandsavior (talk) 10:47, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"20230706104700","author":"Yourlocallordandsavior","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Yourlocallordandsavior-20230706104700-Why_isn't_the_battles_of_the_Hundred_Days'_Offensive_combined?","replies":[]}}-->