Template talk:Ahnentafel-compact5

This template was considered for deletion on 2017 December 14. The result of the discussion was "keep".

New version?

What do people think about {{User:Ras52/Ahnentafel-compact5}} is a possible replacement for this template?

In the case that each ancestor, 1–31, is specified, it will do exactly the same as the current template, so it is backwards compatible with the existing version. However, it also copes with missing ancestors, and instead of displaying {{{n}}} (as the current template does), it omits that fragment of the tree, and compresses the remaining part. For example, the following could be used on William the Conqueror's page:

William I of Normandy

Richard I of Normandy

Sprota

Richard II, Duke of Normandy

Gunnora, Duchess of Normandy

Robert II, Duke of Normandy

Judith

Ermengarde of Anjou

The main disadvantage of this is that it increases the complexity of template by adding a lot of parser functions — those are the things that look like {{{#if:{{{1|}}}|...}}. These don't complicate the HTML produced, but they do make the template a real sod to edit.

A couple of caveats: you can't omit one person and include an ancestor of that person (e.g. omit 2 but include 4), but you can always put 2= ''Unknown'', or similar, in that situation. Also, you can't omit person 1. But I don't think either of these are really going to be issues.

Anyway, what do people think? — ras52 22:35, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No comments, so I'll be bold and change it. — ras52 11:06, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wish someone would do the same for template:Ahnentafel-compact6. I really want to show someone's great-great-great-grandfather, but having so many blank squares defeats the whole idea of showing a family tree for this individual.--Brianann MacAmhlaidh (talk) 07:52, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have produced a version of Ahnentafel-compact6 which only shows the configured nodes. Following testing at User:Bob1960evens/Canalrow, I have move it into the template space.

Southend Waterworks Company (1865-1970)

Essex Water (1970-1994)

South Essex Waterworks Company (1861-1970)

Essex & Suffolk Water (from 1994)

Suffolk Water plc (1991-1994)

Great Yarmouth Waterworks Company (1853-1962)

East Anglian Water Company (1962-1991)

Lowestoft Waterworks Company (1948-1962)

Lowestoft Water and Gas Company (1897-1948)

Lowestoft Gas, Water and Markets Company (1853-1897)

I would really like it to bunch up a bit more when lots of the branches are missing, but am struggling to make that work. Is there an editor for this sort of stuff, as I have done it all by hand, which is a bit tedious? Bob1960evens (talk) 18:32, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request from Lexylou24, 24 November 2010

{{edit semi-protected}} It would seem appropriate to me that it be noted George Washington Custis Lee's step great great grandfather was the Father of our country, George Washington. I know there is no "blood" connection. However, since George Washington was the only father that his great grandfather ever knew it seems that he should be mentioned. Lexylou24 (talk) 19:58, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Which country is "our" country, exactly? Speaking seriously now, your request does not seem to relate to the page at hand. If you were thinking of a different page that transcludes this template, you should post the request on that page's talk page. Intelligentsium 04:29, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Other langueges

Why is there such a mess in the list of interlanguage links of this template? Some of them are twice, some are not sorted. I do not know much about templates, though. WikiHannibal (talk) 19:59, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Binary numbering?

Since genealogy is by nature very binary, and binary numbers are more suitable for such things, wouldn't it make more sense to prefer binary numbering? Even Ahnentafel#Reverse second method uses binary, though it confuses me that it's the second method. The decimal numbering "first method" makes no sense at all on any level. It is not at all intuitive. Shouldn't this template deprecate decimal numbering? D. F. Schmidt (talk) 13:25, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Markup problem

At Henry FitzRoy, 1st Duke of Richmond and Somerset#Family tree there's an additional |} after the family tree. It may be caused by {{Ahnentafel bottom}} though. —George8211 / T 19:57, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Stray end-center HTML tag

I've come across many ahnentafels with an unexplained < / center > HTML tag after the closure of this template, and no opening center tag. AWB flags them and I remove them if I'm already editing the article. They seem to have been added by hand in the distant past. Can anyone explain them, or am I just seeing an editor with a careless copy/paste? Here's one such diff. David Brooks (talk) 19:45, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template-protected edit request on 2 October 2017

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Please add {{subst:tfm|Ahnentafel5}}, per a nomination by Chicbyaccident {{repeat|p|3}}ery (talk) 20:07, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ >^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ< 02:21, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template-protected edit request on 15 March 2018

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Please add a {{subst:tfm}} tag, per a nomination by Chicbyaccident {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 21:03, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 11:19, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]