Store a family tree’s people and relationships as editable records linked to supporting evidence, then render the diagram from that reviewed information. Keep uncertain relationships explicit and compare every publication version with the source records before approving the visual.
Separate people from their displayed labels
A family history can contain several people with the same name, changed surnames, or incomplete dates. Give each person a stable internal identity rather than using the displayed name as the only way to connect records. The diagram can show a readable label while the source distinguishes individuals reliably.
Record alternative names and the evidence supporting them without forcing every variation onto the printed page. This allows the author to correct a label or choose a clearer display form without accidentally merging two people. A visually simple family tree still needs a source structure capable of representing the actual research.
Record relationships as claims with evidence
A line between two names represents information, not merely decoration. Keep the relationship and its source together, including uncertainty where the evidence is incomplete or conflicting. Do not let a diagramming tool turn an unresolved research note into an apparently established connection because its template expects every person to have a parent link.
Use a clear editorial method for distinguishing confirmed information from unresolved claims. Explain any symbols or conventions that readers need to interpret the published diagram. The project should preserve the limits of the research rather than make the visual look complete by supplying relationships the author has not established.
Keep private research separate from published content
The working records may contain details that do not belong in the book, particularly for living people. Decide what information the publication actually needs and review sensitive or uncertain material through the appropriate process. A field stored for research does not have to become a label in the public diagram.
KDP's content guidance places responsibility for content and rights with the publisher. Keep relevant review decisions and resolve specific privacy or rights questions with suitable advice where necessary. The editable data model should help the author control what is included, rather than automatically exporting every available fact into a reader-facing graphic.
Treat generated visuals as representations to verify
If an AI tool helps create a visual treatment, compare the output with the approved records. Count the people, follow the connections, and inspect every displayed name and date. A plausible family tree can contain misplaced lines, invented labels, or relationships that were never present in the source.
Keep the factual data and labels editable independently of decorative artwork where practical. An attractive background should not become the only surviving source of a person's identity or relationship. Preserve generated-image provenance for the publication review while treating the accuracy of the diagram as a separate editorial responsibility.
Design the diagram around readable relationships
Test the tree at the intended publication size. Dense generations and long labels can make connections difficult to follow even when the information is correct. Consider dividing the material into linked diagrams with clear context rather than shrinking one enormous tree until its labels become impractical to read.
Keep the diagram's scope explicit. A partial tree should identify which family branch or period it shows so readers do not interpret omitted people as evidence that no others existed. Compare the labels and legend with the surrounding narrative, especially when the text uses names or dates differently from the diagram's concise display.
Propagate corrections through every occurrence
When a name, date, or relationship changes, update the source record first and identify all affected diagrams and narrative passages. Review indexes, captions, and notes as well as the main tree. A correction is incomplete if the new diagram disagrees with a chapter that still describes the earlier interpretation.
Save the approved source revision with the exported graphic and manuscript. Recheck the final publication at its actual size and verify that the selected evidence and uncertainty conventions survived. The editable records preserve the research for future work, while the reviewed export provides readers with a clear and appropriately qualified representation of that research.
Frequently asked questions
Clear answers for this publishing decision.
Can I use names as the only identifiers in the source tree?
That can create confusion when names repeat or change. Stable internal identities help preserve the correct relationships while display labels are revised.
Should an uncertain relationship be drawn like an established one?
Use an explicit, understandable treatment that reflects the evidence. Do not make the tree appear complete by silently converting an unresolved claim into a confirmed connection.
What should be updated after a relationship is corrected?
Review every affected diagram, caption, narrative passage, note, and index entry. Keep the final export connected to the corrected source revision.
How do I get from an idea and a brief to an editable manuscript I can finish?
Write the brief first, generate a structure you can edit, then draft and revise the manuscript in reviewable sections so one change never overwrites work you already approved.
Start a book project from a brief