Template talk:Family tree

Transcluded template limits
Maintainers of this template may be interested in the issues raised at Templates for deletion/Log/2007 June 4. –Pomte 21:28, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Large Family Tree?
Can we do anything about the problem with large trees? Like making the template work with them? I encountered the problem at User:Canaen/ClanFraserLineage.  Canæn    06:24, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Big trees
I'd also like to request support for big trees. I couldn't finish the Spanish royal tree. Atropos 08:09, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
 * The problem appears to be that this template (group) is quite inefficient. Take a look at the history of User:Wknight94/Stuff In Progress from July 28, 2007.  When I did a subst: on the whole page, the size jumped from 5,684 bytes to over one million!!!  (I bet the software refuses to expand templates past the 1,000,000 byte mark).  I'll take a look at improving the efficiency but I'm not particularly experienced in the template technology here.  Any help is welcome.  —Wknight94 (talk) 13:48, 28 July 2007 (UTC)


 * One thing that would help would be moving the tile styles into MediaWiki:Common.css. It might not help much with supporting bigger trees, since the problem there seems to mostly involve template transclusion limits on the server side, but it should at least make the HTML output shorter.  I think something like the following CSS rules, with appropriate class names on the   tags, should do it:


 * The rules could be made a bit nicer with more advanced CSS selectors, but then we'd get breakage in older browsers, which would be bad. I've been meaning to do something like this for some time, but have never really got around to it.  I think I'll try it out in userspace and, if it works, try to implement it within a week or two.  (We'll need to wait a while between adding the styles to Common.css and modifying the template, since browsers tend to cache stylesheets rather aggressively.)  —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 18:50, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
 * This is the type of thing I'm trying to do. I've managed to get the size down about 50%.  Unfortunately CSS isn't my strongest point either...  User:Wknight94/monobook.css is my modest beginning.  —Wknight94 (talk) 19:58, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Okay, try this (whoever is reading). Copy User:Wknight94/monobook.css to your monobook.css, clear your cache, and then take a look at User:Wknight94/Stuff In Progress. Look the same I hope? The HTML that is generated is less than half the size (the top half expanded to 9,423 characters this new way as opposed to 19,970 characters with the original code) which I'm hoping will allow for twice as many templates to be expanded. Leave comments here - if there are no objections, I will go to WP:VPT and propose having my monobook.css appended to MediaWiki:Common.css. Thanks. —Wknight94 (talk) 23:58, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Assuming you mean that the top of each half matches the bottom, yes, it looks that way. JPG-GR 00:08, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

The preprocessor update seems to have improved matters significantly, making large trees more feasible. However, you may also want to look at the new chart template which makes more efficient use of the preprocessor and gives some additional functionality. TimR (talk) 18:19, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Adoption problem
There's still the problem at Julio-Claudian family tree of having to use dashed lines for both marriages and adoption. If we could either fit more marriage connections (I don't see a way to get more than one horizontal connection per side per row) or get another set of lines like a dotted or double line, then the ambiguity could be solved. I guess it's too much to hope for numbering marriages, too, but any suggestions are welcome as we lost a lot of information switching from Image:JulioClaudian.svg. &mdash; Laura Scudder &#9742; 01:53, 15 August 2007 (UTC)


 * For dotted lines, see the new chart template. TimR (talk) 18:16, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Minor errors
"]" and "{" don't align properly at the moment, although "C" and "(" do. See

{{familytree |[| |{| |C| |(|}}

(Nothing major, but if someone is familiar enough with the template syntax, he may be able to fix it. I'd rather not mess with it myself.) – sgeureka t•c 15:13, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I think I've [ fixed it]. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 19:27, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Woohoo! Thanks. :-) – sgeureka t•c 19:32, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

How do I make the boxes wider?
See Habsburg family tree. Thanks, Mark J (talk) 13:31, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
 * You can put more boxes with no borders. See pl:template:Tolkienowie. --pl:user:Matma Rex —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.29.158.246 (talk) 11:37, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

New chart template
I've been extremely impressed with this set of templates, and have made some worthwhile use of them already. However, I became a little frustrated with quite how much preprocessor resource they consumed. On one page I found that putting just a few medium-sized trees on an already-large page was enough to break the rendering, which was a shame.

As a result, I put some considerable effort into rewriting the template set to make more efficient use of the preprocessor, to allow larger trees. Of course, nothing's simple, and shortly after I got a sensible and extensible solution, the preprocessor was updated. The familytree template fares a lot better under the new preprocessor, rendering my changes less urgent.

However, I was able to entend the functionality slightly to include two new solid/dashed mixed tiles and a whole new set of dotted and solid/dotted mixed tiles. For further details on how to use the new set of templates, and how to migrate existing family tree diagrams to new chart diagrams, see the chart template page. TimR (talk) 18:14, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Should this page be added to the following category
addition of [ [ Category:Genealogy templates| ] ]


 * No; this template is itself not an actual template of a specific genealogy. It's used to format other genealogy templates. Gary King  ( talk ) 00:11, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Accessibility
I've raised my concerns about the accessibility of this template. Please comment, and help to improve it. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 19:38, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

New tool
I've created a tool to make it easier to create or update diagrams using these templates. It allows you to edit the diagram in pure ASCII art, similar to how Ilmari had originally envisioned. Check out User:GregU/familytree.js and let me know any problems or other feedback, as I'm still adding things. --GregU (talk) 16:40, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Images/Files/Photos allowed
How can I add an image into these boxes? Ikip (talk) 01:48, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
 * opps, nevermind, it works. Ikip (talk) 01:50, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Dashed line
Looking at the example

do we really want dashes between married partners? To me it suggests they were not married and something like the following

would be better if they are married. --Rumping (talk) 07:55, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

interwiki
Please add this interwiki link : tr:Şablon:Aileağacı.

Thanks.

87.67.230.164 (talk) 16:48, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Doesn't look right in print
Try creating a PDF of Pope Benedict IX for example. I don't know if this is a problem with the template (bad html) or with the renderer. Headbomb {{{sup|ταλκ}}κοντριβς – WP Physics} 21:04, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

New Option
Can someone Make a variant like option "T", but with a Dashed Line on top & to the left and a solid line to the right? Thanks -- Phoenix (talk) 11:57, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
 * This code looks fairly tortuous and I don't think that is going to be a quick job. The only thing I can say at this point is to ask you to try to add the code to the /sandbox version. &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:53, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Done. Option U is ready and waiting . -- Phoenix (talk) 21:00, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Wow, that wasn't so hard. Can you just confirm that you've fully tested it and that it's working as intended? &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:24, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I have, it works, and it is ready for your edit. I thought that the person who made this page would easily edit this and add that function. Glad to see that I can still decipher code that I am not familiar with :) -- Phoenix (talk) 07:38, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅ &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:04, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
 * It would be nice to have one like U, except the top line is solid. Ideally, to get all the rest of the combinations. I am just missing that one specifically... — MK (t/c) 23:09, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

In practice
I've now used this template on a number of pages - some of the Italian noble families from the 16th an 17th centuries. The names and relationships get complicated (over-use of the same first names makes distinguishing one generation from another very difficult) but this template has made the explaination of inter-generational relationships far easier. The articles for members of these families are full of references to grand-uncle and mother's brother's wife, etc. but this template makes everything far easier. See:


 * Pamphili
 * Barberini
 * House of Mattei

And my sand-box sub-page in all it's code-heavy glory:


 * User:Stalwart111/Barberini family tree

Still a few to go but it's a start.

Stalwart111 (talk) 06:16, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Springett Penn (II), grandson of William Penn
I would like to have Springett Penn (II), grandson of William Penn by his first wife, added to the family tree, but the tree source is intimidating, so I would like someone with the skills needed to add him. --DThomsen8 (talk) 16:17, 24 February 2011 (UTC)


 * ✅. It gets easier the more you use it - have a look at my user sub-page. I kept hacking and slashing away until I had worked it out. Now I can put them together fairly quickly. Have a good one! Stalwart 111  (talk) 23:07, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Family tree of the Eighteenth dynasty of Egypt
Can someone please fix up the family tree? there are quite a dew hiccups. 1) aahmes wife of thutmose I was his sister, not a daughter of amenhotep I, can we put that in? also mutnofret, his other wife is believed to be the daughter of ahmose I, can we show this? 2) neferure was a wife of thutmose III. can we put her on his left, and put merytre hatshepsut on his right? towards the bottom: 3) can we connect the following as daughters of akhenaten by nefertiti: meketaten, ankhesenamun, meritaten, setepenre, neferneferuaten tasherit and neferneferure 4) can we replace the younger lady with kiya, and connect meritaten tasheit and ankhsenpaaten tasherit as daughters by akhenaten and kiya? 5) can we place smenkhkare and the younger lady as children of amenhotep III and tiye? (the younger lady on smenkhkare's left, and meritaten on his right. she was his queen. if the younger lady and smenkhkare come down past their siblings they can sit on the same level akhenaten's daughters. tutankhamun comes down, and if ankhesenamun comes further down then her sister, you can connect her to tutankhamun and everything still looks good!) 6) tutankhamun needs to be placed as a son of the younger lady and her brother smenkhkare, and he needs to connect with ankhsenamun as his wife. --slimmon —Preceding undated comment added 10:41, 2 October 2011 (UTC).

Colorcoding boxes
Can someone help me color code the boxes on Johanna Marau Ta‘aroa base on gender? — Preceding unsigned comment added by KAVEBEAR (talk • contribs) 06:13, 3 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi, Kavebear. I have partially updated the template. I didn't know the gender of many of the entries so I couldn't complete it. The pattern should be clear now if you wish to finish it. Jason Quinn (talk) 02:23, 22 September 2013 (UTC)


 * I finished the tree using the genders specified in the article. Note there's a remaining problem over the total number of children (9 vs 10) that I've tagged with a dubious template. Jason Quinn (talk) 02:37, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

More examples
Could the documentation provide more examples(?), as it still is quite confusing using this template. I can do add one or two examples, but not very complex ones. &#124; Randomno &#124;  17:04, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Rendering issues on Android (4.01) browser
There is background grid and the:

appears as a:

-Oosh (talk) 00:36, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Family tree of ancient Chinese kings
Hi can someone with a better working knowledge take a look at this (scroll about a full page down):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_tree_of_ancient_Chinese_emperors#Wu_.28state.29

and see what might be causing the empty boxes with { – } in them? Thanks. Hanfresco (talk) 07:53, 20 April 2012 (UTC)


 * ✅ It was caused by double spaced blank cells . Shame it went unfixed for almost a year! -- xensyria T 19:55, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Missing some
I'm working on a little pedigree ATM, and noticed that there are some missing combinations. Can someone add these? For example: "(" but with an added dashed-line coming out of the right side.--Brianann MacAmhlaidh (talk) 09:57, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Should this be deprecated?
Should this template be deprecated? chart seems to do everything this does. Am I wrong? Is there something that this does that chart cannot? Jason Quinn (talk) 04:13, 23 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi Jason. Yeah, there are instructions for converting family tree templates over to chart templates. I've used this one on a few of the articles I've expanded but wouldn't mind if they were changed over. Seems to make sense. Stalwart 111  05:16, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

I will wait 7 days or more for further opinions. Barring none, I will add   to the top of the template. The template Deprecated template is a banner warning of the deprecation and which new template to use instead. Jason Quinn (talk) 01:41, 2 October 2013 (UTC)


 * That's fine by me. Are we actually going to work to transfer existing uses of the template over? Stalwart 111  03:20, 2 October 2013 (UTC)


 * My intention to to eventually mark this template as obsolete, and then perhaps even have it deleted. But it's okay in my opinion even if that takes years, after all we've lived with both for some time already. I have already been converting Family tree templates to chart as part of an on-going (but slowly paced) project of mine to add pink and blue gender backgrounds to some of these family trees. There are surprisingly few uses of "Family tree" in Category:Family tree templates but a transclusion count finds almost 2400; so I've only done a drop in the bucket. We could put a request in the deprecated template note above to convert over to the chart template if possible. There's no real pressure to force ourselves to convert all of them in a short time. There's value in just deprecating this template and encouraging only uses of "Chart" in the future. In time, hopefully, uses of "Family tree" will slowly fade away. Jason Quinn (talk) 22:23, 2 October 2013 (UTC)


 * That all sounds very sensible! Stalwart 111  23:47, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

Rendering issue
I am seeing a consistent rendering problem with all family tree templates. I tried converting one to chart, but this didn't help. See example. Jane (talk) 15:30, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Which version of IE are you using? JPG-GR (talk) 20:47, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

I'm getting the same problem using Chrome 32.0.1700.68 beta-m. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.96.49.84 (talk) 21:21, 20 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Same rendering problem suddenly emerged for me. It was fine only a couple of days ago. (I'm using Chrome). Not sure what changed in that interval. Walrasiad (talk) 01:02, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Same problem for me. I am using the latest version of Chrome. Tochozhang (talk) 05:10, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

I've figured out the issue - Chrome is collapsing the space in the cell. This is a Chrome rendering issue and should be reported to their developers. JPG-GR (talk) 14:45, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Template talk:Chart. --  Gadget850talk 03:18, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Problem solved. Details at the link the editor listed above. Short version: All table rows must have the same number of cells or Chrome collapses the row. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.74.21.38 (talk) 19:06, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

- Fixed. another discussion ( Village_pump_(technical)/Archive_124 ) contained the solution, and by crazy stroke of luck this template is not protected, so i was able to fix it. it's about adding "hight:1px" to the style of table rows. it *is* a chrome bug, but no reason to suffer for it if there is an easy workaround. peace - קיפודנחש (aka kipod) (talk) 02:09, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
 * The problem continues in Chrome-based Yandex.browser. For example, three items of the last row of the first example in doc, and many a line in House of Brutus. Ignatus (talk) 10:24, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Visual Redactor
When can I use Visual Redactor to edit Template:Family tree?--Kaiyr (talk) 13:54, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
 * no clue, but this template is deprecated in favour of using template:chart. Frietjes (talk) 18:34, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Recent change
The character at the bottom right of each nine-part set is now showing as an inverted T rather than a simple right-angle. Can someone fix this, please. Bikeroo (talk) 06:35, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
 * There is indeed a problem. An extra line appear at the bottom right of some boxes. Error picture. Why nobody is fixing it?  Daduxing (talk) 16:31, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
 * which browser/os? I don't see any problem in Later Tang. Frietjes (talk) 21:26, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi. The problem was solved some days ago. Village pump (technical)/Archive 135 ---Daduxing (talk) 06:09, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 29 March 2019
Please replace with the current version of the sandbox ([//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:ComparePages&rev1=827250723&rev2=889950839 diff]) to actually show the documentation referred to, as well as eliminate the need for a hard-coded category because the documentation page already transcludes the category. Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 01:18, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done – Jonesey95 (talk) 06:33, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

Skilled Wikipedians needed
Dear, do you know anyone who could be capable of following-up on this merge: Templates_for_discussion/Log/2020_March_22? PPEMES (talk) 20:27, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Probably anyone who has the WP:Template editor bit. I do, but I'm neck deep in other (off-site) stuff now and for the immediate future. This looks like a fairly big job, and should probably involve consultation with the royalty wikiproject, etc.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  02:43, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Given that it is the uses of this template that need to be converted to use Template:Tree chart per the instructions at Template:Tree chart, rather than merging the code of this template, I'd suggest that WP:Template editor is not necessary. What will likely help is the script familytree.js mentioned in the further reading of the instructions that can automate making the necessary changes. What will also help is a place, possibly on this page, where a record is kept of all of the uses of Template:Family tree, who has taken on to change it, when they started, when they finished, or something similar. Tango Mike Bravo (talk) 12:25, 8 April 2020 (UTC)


 * I have to say, I think the latter would just slow things down. Most conversions can literally be done in less than a minute, requiring nothing more than find/replacing every instance of 'familytree' in the template with 'tree chart'.  Of the dozen I have done so far, only one has required any change of the actual code, a single substitution of a single letter.  (I did take longer on some, but only because I decided to improve the chart as I was migrating it.)  'What links here' from the Template page gives you a list of uses, and for most there is little risk of two people editing the same page in that narrow window of time taken (particularly if editors don't all pick the first one to do).  What would most speed the process is simply recruiting more people (at WikiProject:Royalty, WikiProject:Genealogy, etc.), rather than formalizing the process and thus requiring extra steps to register when one begins and finishes working on a page. Just do it. Agricolae (talk) 14:48, 8 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Having followed Agricolae's suggestion, I have taken several pages from what links here and migrated them simply by doing a global find and replace of  with   with no further editing required. I withdraw my suggestions above, other that that WP:Template editor is not required, at least in all cases except possibly when familytree is used in a template. I will continue to do familytree migrations. Tango Mike Bravo (talk) 17:17, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I, like SM, haven't had a chance to look into this merger, but if it's literally just replacing the call to familytree with a call to tree chart, then I can turn this template into a redirect and call it done. Primefac (talk) 20:33, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
 * That is certainly an option. The downside is that there are a small number of differences.  I am now up to about 20 conversions, and have found 2 that needed code conversion beyond the template name switch (both when a horizontal dashed line crosses a vertical solid line, '#' vs 't').  If that is an acceptable corruption rate then yes, redirecting would do it, but if not, if we want to be sure every one is correct, then it would take a systematic approach, either converting every single one so that they disappear from the 'What links here' list and we know what has been vetted, or some sort of directed screening plan after the redirect to be sure they are all looked at even though they don't disappear from the list. Agricolae (talk) 21:07, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
 * In that case, convert it to a wrapper and/or create some tracking cats. We shouldn't be deliberately introducing errors, and a 10% error rate on >2k transclusions is still over 200 pages. I'd rather get an idea of how different the two are, but it's also probably silly for anyone (or even a group of people) to be manually converting them - change the template(s), not the articles! Primefac (talk) 21:19, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Having migrated over 90 instances of familytree, my observations are similar to Agricolae's. Most migrations just need a global replace of  and/or. Of those that don't, I have found several causes of problems: Update: has pointed out that problems with narrow boxes with Template:Tree chart can be overcome by 1. ensuring all boxes are vertically aligned; 2. setting the minimum width of a narrow column by using the  template; and 3. reducing the line width in columns that are too wide by the use of. For example see: Dukes of Clarence family tree after fixing narrow boxes. However I don't think this is as elegant as Dukes of Clarence family tree before migration and is labour intensive. If we are going to automate this process my current suggestions, using the same numbering as in the list of issues above, are: Update Not withstanding the update above, I still think adding a parameter such as  is the way to go. In the mean time I will continue doing manual migrations, but perhaps at a slower rate. Tango Mike Bravo (talk) 14:27, 14 April 2020 (UTC). Updates Tango Mike Bravo (talk) 14:38, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
 * 1) Use of tiles that have changed as per the instructions at Template:Tree chart.
 * 2) Use of box names (that get substituted for the actual content of the boxes) that clash with Tree chart's tile names.
 * 3) Errors in the original use of Familytree, such as missing familytree/start and lines that don't match up with their intended boxes.
 * 4) Distorted trees as a result of the migration. For example compare the Dukes of Clarence family tree before migration with the Dukes of Clarence family tree after migration. There is currently discussion of this layout issue at Template talk:Tree chart. One tree (Duke of Cambridge) was so distorted after migration that I have given up on it for now. I am awaiting to see if my suggestion at 4 below is implemented. If others want to see the distortion I could make the migration and immediately revert it, so that the migrated version is available as a snapshot.
 * 1) Template:Stammbaum which is a redirect to Template:Family tree. This redirect was set up to aid the import of family tree (like diagrams) from de.wiki.
 * 2) There may be others. Over the past 5 days the transclusion count has fallen from 2540 to 2325, which is about 8%.
 * 1) Create a script that looks for and makes substitutions as per Template:Tree chart.
 * 2) Modify Template:Tree chart so that box names on each line are identified before tiles are identified, so if there is a name clash the box name wins.
 * 3) Regrettable as existing errors are, they do not appear to be made worse by the migration, so I would ignore them, except to use the conversion script (at 1 above) to flag up obvious errors like missing   and   for manual fixing.
 * 4) I have suggested at Template talk:Tree chart that an extra parameter could be added to Template:Tree chart such as   with default  . When   then the extra html code generated by Template:familytree would be output. This could either be added to the migration script (at 1 above) or the migration script could in addition to flagging errors (at 4 above) also flag complex trees (where complex is determined in terms of numbers of columns and/or rows) for manual inspection and possible application of the   parameter.
 * 1) I have migrated all current uses of Template:Stammbaum to Template:Tree chart and initiated a discussion on changing the redirect from the former to the latter, see: Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 April 13, which I encourage others to visit and comment on. Update: Discussion is now closed. Template:Stammbaum now redirects to Template:Tree chart. Tango Mike Bravo (talk) 11:18, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
 * 2) If there is to be an automated or semi-automated process for these migrations, then others should think about and/or get experience of the migration progress and add their observations, so as to minimise the possibility of unforeseen causes of problems not being taken account of.
 * I have seen all of the first 4 as well. With the right-side distortions, the non-alignment of the lines with boxes on the far right has been a longstanding problem with treechart when I have made them from scratch. I have also seen several where the right boxes become exceedingly narrow, something I had never seen when making them from scratch (but I am seeing it in trees that are artificially width-constrained, which may be forcing a compression one wouldn't normally see). Agricolae (talk) 15:07, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Update 1 Regarding narrow columns after migrating to tree chart, I have found that all that is needed is one use of  per narrow column. However this is a workaround and not a decent fix.
 * Update 2 I have been tracking progress on a google spreadsheet. I update it several times a day. The final figure for each day is around 9pm to 11pm in Italy. Tango Mike Bravo (talk) 09:13, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Specifically regarding the far-right column bug, I stumbled across a simple solution that is working is multiple cases. If one extends blank cells on a shorter line until it is beyond the shortened last box, that last box is no longer compressed, and the line is no longer misaligned either.  Compare the Didžioji Kova box in original and modified versions, without and with extra cells added at the end of the first line (after East in the code).:




 * I used a similar approach, this time adding an extra line of longer blank code, to fix the line distortions here (being a single column, it is subject to last-column effects on alignment):
 * I used a similar approach, this time adding an extra line of longer blank code, to fix the line distortions here (being a single column, it is subject to last-column effects on alignment):
 * I used a similar approach, this time adding an extra line of longer blank code, to fix the line distortions here (being a single column, it is subject to last-column effects on alignment):
 * I used a similar approach, this time adding an extra line of longer blank code, to fix the line distortions here (being a single column, it is subject to last-column effects on alignment):
 * I used a similar approach, this time adding an extra line of longer blank code, to fix the line distortions here (being a single column, it is subject to last-column effects on alignment):






 * Still a workaround, but an easy one. Agricolae (talk) 19:29, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Good Lord, this issue was discussed multiple times on the tree chart/chart talk page and i gave the solution but people don't listen. When you have this:

just add more pipes  at the end of the longest row, and you will have this.

This is not a bug. Those family trees are using the table syntax and this is how the things are working. Also compare those two:

--Daduxing (talk) 05:36, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, it is a bug, or was it the plan to have the template to intentionally distort the last column unless an awkward workaraound is used? Agricolae (talk) 12:40, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Progress & Questions, Progress: around 8pm CEST this evening I've done some counting. What points here lists 1261 items and the transclusion count was 1190. I think the former has some double counting. What points here includes about 137 Talk items (not including User & Template), 489 User items (including Talk), 22 Template items (including Talk) other than about 20 Family tree items, for a total of about 660. There were also 26 /Archive items, some of which are already in the 660. Due to the way I did the counting there was also some other double counting. Questions: 1. Rather than trying to migrate Family tree on User & Talk pages, would a note and offer of assistance in migrating be in order? 2. What should be done about the Archive items - if Family tree is deleted, the Archives will be broken.Tango Mike Bravo (talk) 18:35, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I have every intention of just redirecting this template when the conversions are complete; from what it sounds like the only issues are the edge cases, so rather than convert every instance of this template we might as well just deal with the edge cases that would break a redirect and leave the rest for now. I still haven't had a chance to dig into those differences, but if someone can tell me if there's an easy way to track those edge cases we can set up a cat and have the bot run through them all to fix 'em. Primefac (talk) 19:13, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I have identified edge cases, listed above below the first outdent. Using the above numbering, and summarising my suggestions for automation, 1 could be flagged by a bot or automatically fixed, 2 could be flagged by a bot or automatically fixed by adding 'x' to names that clash, or as suggested the order of processing could be changed, 3 as suggested existing errors should probably be ignored, 4 I have suggested how narrow columns could be fixed, see above (I think the only way of spotting when narrow columns is a problem is by visual inspection), 5 as noted in update above, this is now fixed, 6 as noted above there may be other cases. Tango Mike Bravo (talk) 11:18, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

What next? Progress on manual migration has stopped. There are still many pages that link here. Is it time to start looking for / creating a bot? Perhaps the first stage would be a bot that creates a list of what links here and creates a note for each such as no conflict (with Tree chart), & requires edit (to work with Tree chart). If there are only a small number of requires edit then they could be dealt with manually. Also what of pages that are not in main article space? There are pages in the following spaces: Category:, Draft: , File: , File talk: , Help: , Help talk: , Talk: , Template: (only Family tree & Tree chart) , Template talk: , User: , User talk: , Wikipedia: , Wikipedia talk:. Within those some pages are s. Before discussing what to do with each of these non article space pages, it may help to know how many of each would be broken by a redirect of Family tree to Tree chart. Perhaps a first step would be to ask for help at AutoWikiBrowser/Tasks. I've tried to install AutoWikiBrowser (a Windows .exe) but despite several hours effort have been unable to run it on my linux machine. With a view to help communicating what needs to be searched for I will modify the test cases noted below to only include tiles that need to be replaced. Tango Mike Bravo (talk) 19:47, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
 * On my page User:Tango Mike Bravo/Migrate notes I have made some notes on the migration process which may help to describe to others, such as if we make a request at AutoWikiBrowser/Tasks, what still needs to be done. At the foot of the page is a list of the outstanding pages in article space. Against each of the articles starting "A" I have made notes. In summary I have found that 41 are compatible with Tree chart (ie would not break if Family tree were redirected), 6 would need to be changed, 3 would require further investigation to determine their status and 5 I migrated as the simplest way of checking for compatibility. A further 4 were broken, which I have fixed and migrated. If the same proportions hold we could expect of the now 636 un-migrated pages, about 555 pages to be compatible and 71 which would need to be migrated. Within these compatible and need to be migrated pages there may be about 43 broken trees. Tango Mike Bravo (talk) 16:33, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much for your kind help! Regrettably, I am not skilled enough to help you proceed. If you cannot manage, may I suggest you seek help and assistance elsewhere where relevant from other users? I would be great if we could finnaly close this merge. You have done a great job so far! Unfortunately, I can but rely on your efforts for my unkowns unkowns about the details, including to whom and where further help may be found. PPEMES (talk) 12:30, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I should be able to manage any "easy" migrations with the bot, though I admit I haven't had as much of an opportunity to really dig into this as it requires. I will attempt to do so this weekend. Primefac (talk) 01:48, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Test cases for migration
I have created a set of test cases for the migration of Family tree to Tree chart at Template:Family tree/testcases.

Two types of potential error in the migration are tested for:


 * 1) Use of tiles that have changed and empty cells as per the instructions at Template:Tree chart.
 * 2) Use of box names (that get substituted for the actual content of the boxes) that clash with Tree chart's tile names.

If requested I could write up the rational for the test cases and how complete coverage is ensured.

I have assumed that all cases are covered by the documentation of both Tree chart and Family tree. If this is not the case, then there will be missing cases.

The previous content of the test page was:

Family tree

Tango Mike Bravo (talk) 14:36, 27 April 2020 (UTC) Update: Tango Mike Bravo (talk) 14:38, 27 April 2020 (UTC)