Editing Template talk:Familytree

== Valeriis ==

Would a family tree on the Valeriis be useful or no? Since never had the "parents" she thought she did, and there's more than one copy.--[[User:DrWho42|DrWho42]] 14:08, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
:I went through all the "active" character that we have. The only one that is as complex is only the Adama's. Granted, Athena + Helo = Hera and Cheif + Cally = Nick and even Lee adama had a "son" that died, I wasn't sure if I were going to add them because it's not the Adama tree. So... i really don't know-- [[User:Shane|Shane]] ([[User_Talk:Shane|talk]]) 14:14, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
::I was kindof wondering about the oddity of her "having" the parents [[Abraham Valerii]] and [[Katherine Valerii]], when they never existed to begin with. Also, I suspect [[Gianne]] and Lee's unborn son wouldn't be included? --[[User:DrWho42|DrWho42]] 14:35, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
::: Never "family" per say, but gene's were "mixed". Define: Family. [[User:Shane|Shane]] ([[User_Talk:Shane|talk]]) 14:41, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

== Alternative to this? ==

By the Gods, the syntax on this monstrosity is looking mighty hideous today! I believe my eyes were about to well with blood and spew forth as I read the syntax... Is there a better alternative to this thing? Something that's more human readable, because you really need a decoder ring and a case of Jack Daniels to figure this thing out. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support|Donate]] - [[bsp:|Battlestar Pegasus]]</sup> 14:24, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
:I figured it out. :) Wasn't that hard. :) (This coming from a programer's point of view...). There was [[w:Template:Chart|Template:Chart]], but it was just as complex as this. -- [[User:Shane|Shane]] ([[User_Talk:Shane|talk]]) 14:29, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
::Yeah, ''that'''s the problem. You need to be a computer programmer to use this thing... But given that we're not going to be using it much, I figure I can live with it... until something better comes along. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support|Donate]] - [[bsp:|Battlestar Pegasus]]</sup> 14:35, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
:It's a bit intimidating, but since there aren't many large families, I don't see this being used much. So it might as well be complicated -- [[User:Serenity|Serenity]] 14:51, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
::Except the Cylons. lol -- [[User:Shane|Shane]] ([[User_Talk:Shane|talk]]) 15:14, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

== Family tree inclusion thoughts ==

I find that the present inclusion of the family tree to be aesthetically displeasing. Creating a section for the family tree causes a break in the article body that looks very jarring, if not unprofessional in appearance. Shorter articles (such as [[Ila]] and [[Zac]]) definitely suffer more because of this, although it is definitely jarring on larger articles such as [[Apollo (TOS)|Apollo]] and [[Adama (TOS)|Adama]].

Wouldn't it be better to shove this thing in a div container and treat it like a captioned picture? You can still have it linked from the infobox by using the {{tl|inlineref}} template somewhere near the chart to add the anchor... Or, barring that, perhaps a separate page dedicated to family trees. (Though that might pose its own problem, since there aren't that many family trees to begin with... The only other once I can think of relating to the Original Series is the [[Michael]]/[[Sarah Fowler]] and children family tree.) 

Thoughts? Suggestions? Comments? -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support|Donate]] - [[bsp:|Battlestar Pegasus]]</sup> 15:34, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
:Great minds think alike. There are not many "complex ones" but even if we created a whole bunch of smaller ones that were family related, we could put them in a series article linked from the {{tl|Character Data}} template. Articles are fishy. It works... to a degree. [[User:Shane|Shane]] ([[User_Talk:Shane|talk]]) 15:42, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
:: Right, I'd prefer a separate article. (Even then, I find that the family tree is really a regurgitation of information that is already in the Character infobox, since the whole family tree is pretty much laid out in a majority of them, anyway.) Only real difference is that this is in chart form, which may be beneficial for an family tree overview article. Also, I can see this thing spiraling out of control fast... so we should really establish a guideline for the usage of family tress (when they should be used, where they should be used, etc.). -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support|Donate]] - [[bsp:|Battlestar Pegasus]]</sup> 15:51, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
::: Yeah. Soon we could have so many family tree's that are just single couples... as talked about... Cally/Chief/Nick and Athena/Helo/Hera. And then we get in to the whole cylon "chain of command" and colonial chain of command which would work actually. [[User:Shane|Shane]] ([[User_Talk:Shane|talk]]) 15:55, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
:Yeah, it does look a bit odd. For longer articles, it's not bad, but for short ones, it stands out too much. Moving it below Notes would also be better if it's kept in the articles. All in all, we should only use it for large families then, and not for the Tyrols for example, where the parents aren't really established as characters. So only for families with 3 generations. And we could have a general "Family Trees (RDM)" article that lists several one, instead of just an "Adama family tree (RDM)" article and another "Graystone family tree" one.