Well I guess Peter's comments were not 'Answer's so maybe mine is the only Answer? Not a Chrome issue with that...
My point is that EU privacy issues have changed regarding DNA test results and their display - no solution has been finalized but directionally it goes where FTDNA and GEDmatch were going previously, that FTDNA kit #s should not be associated with the testee's name directly. Of course one could always leave blank a field but that reduces the adjacent functionality of the WikiTree data. Additional privacy options on these data might resolve the 'fan dance' dilemma better but could get tedious.
As a Surname project manager at FTDNA my project sees value in using WikiTree to host pedigree data tied to actual Y test results but the tools and privacy features are not quite there yet.
NGS testing has opened the floodgates on SNPs and their implied lineal relationships. Shared SNPs are moving into the genealogical timeframe so the value to WikiTree and to us as a project is more substantive with the 16th century and earlier. The challenges for documentation increase at the point that the value of DNA results for lineal descendants becomes more practical.
I'm suggesting features as simple as hiding actual kit numbers behind icons that automate an FTDNA site search for members, to constructing parallel SNP trees within WikiTree such as that suggested by Alex Williamson recently. Ken Sargent also appears to have some relevant suggestions as does Magnus Salvo.
When we share STR results among project members for instance we do not identify the project member's name - only the kit # and his most distant known ancestor. Members can decide whether or not to share additional info with other project members selectively, including contact info. And the toolset for project managers is robust in the sense that we are equipped to be 1st level support to members.
Regarding official partnerships - it would be great if you could figure out a revenue model for being the back-end family tree functionality for all of the independent testing firms, as well as the analytics services growing up around NGS. This would include FTDNA, FGC, YSeq, YFull, GEDmatch, etc. This would greatly reduce the amount of back and forth one much do between different websites presently, increase the value of the WikiTree data, and increase surname project effectiveness on the whole.
Just thoughts for your consideration... ;-)