Template talk:Biochemical families navs

added glycosides
initially I was expanding an article on Devil's Backbone then I sort of started article on daigremontianin (the glycoside the plant contains) then I made a template for glycosides (they are numerous!!) I sortof wanted them to be like sort of a subdivision of carbohydrates but there's this widely used template where they could be added in the headline instead of making three level template - families of biochemicals/carbohydrates/glycosides

plus they can be categorized by the aglycone (what would make them subdivision of the biochemical family the aglycone is of)

and this template is intended to be functional not represent academic classification

so what do you think? Okyea 23:04, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

probably everyone is welcome to correct my grammer; I'm not sure if saying by geometry is ok.

This looks much better when its inserted at the bottom of another template/navbox!

Use |below=

83.146.12.212 (talk) 10:29, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Navbox
Is there a reason that this template doesn't use a navbox, e.g. as below?

--Kkmurray (talk) 17:52, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

New layout
IMHO the new layout takes focus from the primary template, example Template:Amino_acids. Before the links to other templates was a two-liner, but now it nearly half of the template. Christian75 (talk) 19:14, 26 March 2015 (UTC)