Talk:cousin

Should we have Polyglot's [|family tree] as a see also on all these relatives? Or some other way of linking formally? Should family tree become an appendix or special page? trunkie 10:33, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)


 * If the family tree gets used it should be moved to its own appendix. It still needs quite a bit of work though. Feel free to improve it, if you see a way to do that. I'm not entirely happy with it the way it is right now. I don't see how to improve it though, using only html. The reason for using only html is that it should be easily editable by fellow wiktionarians. The original idea was to have a template where other languages could have been filled in instead of the English.
 * Maybe it's better to use some little trees instead of trying to put it all on one big tree that quickly becomes very tangled (and too wide for viewing without scrolling horizontally).

Also have a look at the talk page. Petruk proposed a different way of skinning the cat... Polyglot 11:05, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

RFC discussion: October 2012
The translations use indents, specifically ** or *: for usage qualifiers instead of by language or by script such as *: Mandarin and *: Cyrillic (both of these two examples are standard). Also, we do just want the word for 'cousin' in these translations, languages which have specific words for maternal cousin and paternal cousin but also just have a word for cousin, that sort of extra information should go in the language's entry itself. The reason is usability. Yes, we sometimes act like our users aren't human beings, but they are! Adding tonnes of qualifiers and extra information makes translation tables much harder to use, which is why I sometimes remove such information and put it in the language itself. Mglovesfun (talk) 10:27, 26 October 2012 (UTC)


 * I've fixed the nesting issue. We could move some info to entries like paternal cousin, maternal cousin (and link to those entries via trans-see), but many of the translations and glosses (e.g. Ewe's) are best presented the way they currently are presented, IMO. - -sche (discuss) 02:40, 29 October 2012 (UTC)