Board Thread:Boruto Discussions/@comment-40267371-20190724171636/@comment-9782468-20190725182722

Fair point on the first paragraph

Regarding the second thing, again, "adoptive parent" would be a good description in that case. Bioligically, Mitsuki is closer Orochimaru's brother.

You misunderstood my comments regarding Log. I said that from a DNA standpoint, they're all close to being twins (triplets in this case) because they share the same DNA. Identical twins have the identical DNA, so genetically speaking that's what they're all closest too. So Log being classified as Mitsuki's brother is closer to correct than Orochimaru being his parent, at least from a genetic standpoint.

"The Family section is supposed to tell you who the person is related to, not how the character was created/born."

And it should show how they are related. "Genetic Template" describes how they are related to one another.

I understand the sentiment that Orochimaru assumed the parental role and should be properly cited to do so. But there's many reasons why that doesn't always work in terms of the infobox. Naruto for example considers Iruka his father, as he told him when Naruto and Hinata were getting married. And Iruka had more of a hand raising Naruto than Minato or Kushina did, since they died. But we describe genetic relationships in the infobox, not the actual type of interpersonal relationship they had.

Now, Orochimaru is different since he created Mitsuki. He deserves a spot in Mitsuki's infobox. But genetically speaking, he isn't Mitsuki's parent. Mitsuki is his clone.

Now, even while I say this, I see that Orochimaru's infobox has Mitsuki and Log both listed as his sons. I've been discussing with you here not because I entirely disagree with you, but because I see the sense in how it's written now and I'm open to being convinced that it should be changed.

But if Orochimaru has them listed as his sons, it definitely is weird to not have Orchimaru listed as their parent. Consistency is important.