Forums: Index > The Wizengamot archive > Limiting family in the infobox

I know this has been discussed before, but I think we need to establish a policy concerning the entries in the family section of the infobox. Some entries, especially those that are only a few lines, have infoboxes that are three to four times the size of the article due to it. - Cavalier One(Wizarding Wireless Network) 18:40, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, like maybe don't include distant, distant, realtives, like placing Voldemort in Harry Potter's family box. They are related throught the peverells, but that is really distant.-Matoro183 (Talk) 23:07, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
Exactly what I mean. And no great-nephew/neice, cousin once removed stuff either. - Cavalier One(Wizarding Wireless Network) 08:11, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
A policy would be nice soon, because I'm looking all over the place and seeing things like great-great-granddaughter in-law.-Matoro183 (Talk) 22:28, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
Someone has been very helpful in looking up every single twist and turn in the bloodlines of the wizarding community and has added tonnnnnns of information in the infoboxes - but i agree i think it's really excessive, especially the WEASLEYS. My god. I swear there are just too many of them. Mafalda Hopkirk 08:22, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
Have you seen Phineas Nigellus? I took some of the family out, but it was crazy. This one user spent at least five hours, just adding family. There was Harry Potter, great-great-great-grandson in-law, and other things like that. I don't know which family members to take out of the infobox.-Matoro183 (Talk) 12:37, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Proposals - here are two formal proposals.

Proposal 1 - The list of family in any character's infobox should only be two generations in either direction. This means no higher in the chain that grandparents, and no lower than grandchildren. This option therefore covers grandparents, parents, siblings, spouses, children and grandchildren. It will also include uncles, aunts, cousins, neices, nephews and direct in-laws such as brother-in-law and sister-in-law. When linking to further family, link to the appriopriate family page (ie, the House of Black, or Weasley).
Proposal 2 - Much like the option above, but limited to one generation in either direction. No higher than parents, no lower than children.
In any case, there are several things that should not be included.
Multiple generations down to great-great-great-great-great-grandson.
Assumptions on the relationships between characters just because they have the same surname. If characters with the same surname are listed in the family box and the relationship is unknown, it should be listed as "possible".
Thoughts and comments? - Cavalier One(Wizarding Wireless Network) 15:05, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
I like Proposal 2: Some characters even have a lot of ancestors in just two generations-Matoro183 (Talk) 15:08, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
I like proposal 1, with an exception that people like Ignotus Peverell or historical ancestors should be included on main character trees only, as in, not Petunia Dursley... Yeah she is somewhat related to Ignotus Peverell by marriage but i dont think that should be included, whereas Harry's tree, it makes more sense. Mafalda Hopkirk 16:12, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
Either one would be fine. Just something needs to be done -- a lot of articles are getting totally ridiculous. -- DarkJedi613 (Talk) 13:50, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

I like this one as a general policy but we should be willing to add more if talk page discussion determines that some ancestors are important enough to be added or in other unique circumstances. John Reaves (talk) 21:37, 10 December 2007 (UTC)


I think that both are good but like in the case of the Pervell Brothers Harry should be included. -Harry Potter Fantic 1 01:54, 5 December 2007 (UTC) Harry Potter Fantic 1

I think that we should only have the parents, children and maybe brothers. Remove cousins, uncles, aunts, grand parents and stuff. Lord Opeth 03:15, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

We do have to ability to add a show/hide feature to templates if anyone is willing to tackle that... John Reaves (talk) 21:37, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

I've been working on some basic standard templates to be used for infoboxes, I can see about implementing it. -- DarkJedi613 (Talk) 21:51, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Dead Family Members

I know some articles have the "dagger" (†) for deceased family members in the infobox. I kinda don't like this idea and was wondering what other people's thoughts on it where? -- DarkJedi613 (Talk) 15:22, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't like it much. It just seems a bit silly but i'm open to other input. Mafalda Hopkirk 18:57, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
I'm torn. On one hand, it is encyclopedic, but on the other, it does look a little over the top. I'm for using it in battle infoboxes to denote casualties, however. - Cavalier One(Wizarding Wireless Network) 19:08, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
I also don't like the addition of how old a person was when they died, in the infoboxes. It is sufficient, i think, to have birth and death dates. I think it is needless to have "(age 71)" after the death date, for instance. Mafalda Hopkirk 22:51, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
So, have we reached any sort of conclusion about this at all? I'm 100% for removing the daggers. -- DarkJedi613 (Talk) 17:36, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm for: no daggers in family infoboxes, but use them to denote casualties in battle infoboxes. I also see no real need for a character's age when they died - we would need to apply that to all characters (which would be a little confusing as say, Harry, would currently be 27). - Cavalier One(Wizarding Wireless Network) 11:08, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm for what Cav said. Mafalda Hopkirk 17:56, 3 January 2008 (UTC)


Ok, the vote is in and the winner is Proposal 1.

From now on, all character infobox family sections will be limited to two generations in either direction, with only direct family being mentioned. In special cases, such as Lord Voldemort and Harry Potter, special ancestors such as members of the Peverell brothers or Salazar Slytherin will be allowed. If a member of a large family, e.g, the Weasleys or the House of Black, a link in the family box will be allowed to show more distant relations. A formal policy page will be posted shortly. - Cavalier One(Wizarding Wireless Network) 21:27, 15 December 2007 (UTC)