automatic copying of haplotypes?

+4 votes
Hi !

Right now I am manually editing something like

== DNA ==
{| border="1"
|+ m-DNA
|Geno 2.0
| H5a1

into the page of each maternal ancestor and down again to her children and the children of her female descendants.

The rules are simple. Couldn't this in a way semi-automated?


in Policy and Style by Andreas Köhler G2G2 (2.3k points)

3 Answers

+3 votes

It wouldn't be hard to add the haplotype to the message that's automatically added to related profiles for DNA tests, but this intentionally been left out.

I'm not sure if this is the main reason for this decision or not, but the main reason I wouldn't include it is that the haplogroup is wrong if your tree is wrong. I know that my maternal haplogroup is H1c1, so I think that's Sarah Jane Elson's haplogroup, but it's always possible that I mixed up two people with the same name somewhere, and she's not actually my ancestor (though I would be horrified if that were the case, considering how much time I've spent on her!). Until several of her descendants have also turned out to be H1c1, I wouldn't assume that she is.

by Lianne Lavoie G2G6 Pilot (423k points)
I understand your point. What do you think of a "haplotype by reference to : ..."

In this case I have check the mtDNA haplotype with 2 different Geno 2 tests, but more often I will have just one. A reference would help both to understand where this (wrong or right) haplotype comes from and how certain this result is.

My intention is to multiply  the additional information. Some people are not interested in DNA testing, some are afraid of giving DNA samples and some do not want to spend the money. In all cases an information on haplotypes is not an issue.

You do not have any medical information just on your haplotype (which is in the end just a name of a regional/ ancestrial DNA category) and no money is spend by the guys on which page this reference is added.

Again: Your point is very valid. A statement like " referenced by.." (any suggestion are welcome)  would help.



Hi Andreas,

As Kitty mentioned in her answer, see (and turn "notifications on" in the upper left corner of the page). I'd like to move this discussion there and see how it works. I'm not sure if it will work better than G2G, but for focused discussions on a specific topic among a small group, I think it has the potential to speed up the interaction.

I think we can and should add a haplogroup field to WikiTree's DNA Tests database.

By connecting the information with the test, it solves the problem that Lianne mentioned. That is, the haplogroup could still go on every profile affected by a test, but it would be clear that it's from that test.


+4 votes
Hi Andreas, Would you like to join our DNA Project?  Also, you might want to join our Google + Community:
by Kitty Smith G2G6 Pilot (553k points)
–2 votes

Hello Andreas,

Yes, I sincerely hope and believe that automating the linking to DNA results in public databases (YSearch, MitoSearch, etc.) and making it easy to search and compare those results will be available soon.  If WikiTree does not do it then others surely will.

I will use my father as an example of what WikiTree currently automates:
On the right side above Comments is a DNA section (ignore the left side for DNA Example).
What I'm suggesting to be automated on the profile of everyone who is on a DNA tested direct paternal or maternal line is something similar to what is at:

which would replace the DNA section.

The profile for Bert's father (Bennie Roberts ) would automatically have the same Y-DNA information but Bennie's mother's mtDNA information.  One of the key points is being able to enter a YSearch or MitoSearch ID and automatically have public profiles along that direct line automatically link to results (of the tested descendant(s) in YSearch or MitoSearch or any other public database and being able to compare and search for matches.

I suggest the emphasis be placed on automated linking and comparing haploTYPES in public databases outside of WikiTree.  I'm concerned that if we focused too much on haploGROUPS (R1b, R-L21, I1, I1a, I-Z59, etc) then many people would easily get confused as to who was related in a genealogical time frame. For example some might think R-L21 was different from R-M259 or R-S145 or R1b1a2a1a2c  when in fact they are (currently) all labels for the same haplogroup subclade.  Others might think because two direct paternal lines are both "R-L21" that they must share a direct paternal line ancestor in a genealogical time frame (which is not the case).

Most sincerely, Peter



by Peter Roberts G2G6 Pilot (552k points)
edited by Peter Roberts

Related questions

+14 votes
1 answer
+5 votes
2 answers
+9 votes
2 answers
274 views asked Aug 31, 2016 in Genealogy Help by Laura Wilson G2G5 (5.2k points)
+5 votes
1 answer
+5 votes
2 answers
289 views asked Oct 8, 2014 in Genealogy Help by anonymous G2G Crew (310 points)
+3 votes
1 answer
57 views asked Mar 3 in WikiTree Tech by Dick Bowers G2G Crew (850 points)
+3 votes
5 answers
240 views asked May 8, 2020 in Policy and Style by Blake Finley G2G5 (5.4k points)
+1 vote
1 answer
98 views asked Jul 7, 2019 in Policy and Style by Anonymous Skye G2G1 (1.1k points)

WikiTree  ~  About  ~  Help Help  ~  Search Person Search  ~  Surname:

disclaimer - terms - copyright