::There’s no justification for this. Whilst it is reasonable to link from one sibling to another in their biographical articles, what benefit would there be to link to [[Gregory W. Brown]] for someone reading the [[The Secret of Secrets (novel)|”The Secret of Secrets” (novel)]] article for example? ”’–[[User:Woodensuperman|<span style=”background:yellow; color:red;;”>wooden</span>]][[User talk:Woodensuperman|<span style=”background:yellow; color:blue;;”>superman</span>]]”’ 10:47, 26 November 2025 (UTC)
::There’s no justification for this. Whilst it is reasonable to link from one sibling to another in their biographical articles, what benefit would there be to link to [[Gregory W. Brown]] for someone reading the [[The Secret of Secrets (novel)|”The Secret of Secrets” (novel)]] article for example? ”’–[[User:Woodensuperman|<span style=”background:yellow; color:red;;”>wooden</span>]][[User talk:Woodensuperman|<span style=”background:yellow; color:blue;;”>superman</span>]]”’ 10:47, 26 November 2025 (UTC)
::And as far as {{tl|Ernest Hemingway}} goes, I think including his entire family in the navbox is also unnecessary, as linking to his relatives is not pertinent when reading articles on his works, and including his entire bibliography on the pages of his relatives ([[Mariel Hemingway]] for example) also places [[WP:UNDUE]] weight on those articles. I don’t think we should include relatives in works navboxes like this, the same way we do not categorise people by other people. I would prefer to see a discrete navbox for his family at {{tl|Ernest Hemingway family}}, like we have at {{tl|Tolkien}}, {{tl|Paul McCartney family}}, {{tl|Chaplin family}}, etc., etc. ”’–[[User:Woodensuperman|<span style=”background:yellow; color:red;;”>wooden</span>]][[User talk:Woodensuperman|<span style=”background:yellow; color:blue;;”>superman</span>]]”’ 11:03, 26 November 2025 (UTC)
::And as far as {{tl|Ernest Hemingway}} goes, I think including his entire family in the navbox is also unnecessary, as linking to his relatives is not pertinent when reading articles on his works, and including his entire bibliography on the pages of his relatives ([[Mariel Hemingway]] for example) also places [[WP:UNDUE]] weight on those articles. I don’t think we should include relatives in works navboxes like this, the same way we do not categorise people by other people. I would prefer to see a discrete navbox for his family at {{tl|Ernest Hemingway family}}, like we have at {{tl|Tolkien}}, {{tl|Paul McCartney family}}, {{tl|Chaplin family}}, etc., etc. ”’–[[User:Woodensuperman|<span style=”background:yellow; color:red;;”>wooden</span>]][[User talk:Woodensuperman|<span style=”background:yellow; color:blue;;”>superman</span>]]”’ 11:03, 26 November 2025 (UTC)
:::Books, family, homes, artworks, etc. are part of a person’s biography. Biographical navboxes encompass someone’s entire life, not just work output. Dividing a biographical subject’s family into a separate navbox just tucks away a part of their life’s events and defeats or unnecessarily dilutes the purpose of a Wikipedia biographical navbox. [[User:Randy Kryn|Randy Kryn]] ([[User talk:Randy Kryn|talk]]) 11:27, 26 November 2025 (UTC)
 |
|
 |
This template was considered for deletion on 3 November 2023. The result of the discussion was “no consensus“. |
Gregory W. Brown should not be included in this navbox. There is no need for him to be linked on every work by Dan Brown, it is sufficient that he is linked at the article Dan Brown. It is also WP:UNDUE for Dan Brown’s entire bibliography to be transcluded at the bottom of his brother’s article. —woodensuperman 10:26, 26 November 2025 (UTC)
- Hello Woodensuperman. Biographical navboxes have always included close relatives. See {{Ernest Hemingway}} and almost any other navbox. Their inclusion has nothing to do with books, a biographical navbox is a Wikipedia map to the articles about the subject, in this case noted author Dan Brown. How do you explain other author’s navboxes including relatives and not Brown’s? And shouldn’t his character Robert Langdon be included on this one as well as the Langdon stand-alone navbox (which is really not needed if all Brown’s articles were included in one place). In any case the brother belongs as a close relative (as would wives, children, etc., but not irrelevant in-laws or cousins etc. which actually show up on some navboxes). Randy Kryn (talk) 10:41, 26 November 2025 (UTC)
- There’s no justification for this. Whilst it is reasonable to link from one sibling to another in their biographical articles, what benefit would there be to link to Gregory W. Brown for someone reading the The Secret of Secrets (novel) article for example? —woodensuperman 10:47, 26 November 2025 (UTC)
- And as far as {{Ernest Hemingway}} goes, I think including his entire family in the navbox is also unnecessary, as linking to his relatives is not pertinent when reading articles on his works, and including his entire bibliography on the pages of his relatives (Mariel Hemingway for example) also places WP:UNDUE weight on those articles. I don’t think we should include relatives in works navboxes like this, the same way we do not categorise people by other people. I would prefer to see a discrete navbox for his family at {{Ernest Hemingway family}}, like we have at {{Tolkien}}, {{Paul McCartney family}}, {{Chaplin family}}, etc., etc. —woodensuperman 11:03, 26 November 2025 (UTC)
- Books, family, homes, artworks, etc. are part of a person’s biography. Biographical navboxes encompass someone’s entire life, not just work output. Dividing a biographical subject’s family into a separate navbox just tucks away a part of their life’s events and defeats or unnecessarily dilutes the purpose of a Wikipedia biographical navbox. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:27, 26 November 2025 (UTC)
