RPG's:
Console RPG-------JRPG
Console RPG-------ARPG--Spectacle Fighter
CRPG--Adventure--Action RPG
FPS------------------ARPG--Looter Shooter
Computer RPG-----ARPG--Immersive Sim
Computer RPG-----ARPG--H'n'S
Computer RPG-----ARPG
Computer RPG-----WRPG
Computer RPG-----Roguelikes--Roguelites

^The Adventure genre appeared and mostly evolved separately from RPGs since back in the '70s.

Console RPGs evolved from CRPGs and to some extent pen & paper RPGs.

(Action Adventure also evolved from CRPGs to an extent, in that Ultima influenced Zelda 1 and The Black Onyx influenced Hydldie)

Spectacle Fighter=originally a flashy Beat 'em up which may or may not include some RPG or AA elements (which the genre started incorporating elements of back in 1989 with River City Ransom), but is still mainly reflexes skill-based. But it seems nowadays it can also mean a shooter.

WRPG=CRPG

The rest seems to make sense besides that format not being the best for displaying such a thing, but I'm not sure what you're trying to say about the page exactly since it lines up with it.

The way I see it:
* Console RPGs are CRPG. In other words, the term CRPG includes JRPGs as well as WRPGs, along with some CRPGs that are hard to categorize.
* Every WRPG is a CRPG, but not every CRPG is a WRPG.
* In particular, the only RPGs that are not CRPGs are those that are not computer/console games of any sort. I'm thinking games like tabletop RPGs (Dungeons & Dragons being the most well-known example), LARPs, and perhaps some gamebooks (like Lone Wolf and maybe Fighting Fantasy, but not Choose Your Own Adventure).

As for RPGs that are hard to categorize:
* Earlier CRPGs came before the WRPG/JRPG split. We see cases like Ultima, with its overhead view world map (as opposed to isometric or first person), or Wizardry whose combat isn't that different from the likes of Dragon Quest 2+ and early Final Fantasy. On the other hand, we have the original Dragon Quest, which is a rather interesting and unique game from a design perspective; it may have more in common with earlier WRPGs than it does with the JRPGs that ist spawned.
* The Romancing SaGa games are also hard to categorize; the structure more closely resembles a WRPG, but the combat system is very JRPG-ish (particularly when you consider that flashy weapon techniques just aren't a thing in WRPGs, but have become common in later JRPGs), albeit with its own unique quirks (technique sparking, for example).

There's been some cross-pollination between Adventure games and earlier WRPGs (if they could even be called such).
* Bell, Book, and Candle: This puzzle first appeared in Zork (at least in terms of computer games as far as I know; apparently it dates back to a 1958 novel), but we see it later in games like Ultima 4, Wizardry 4, and NetHack; I believe it even shows up in The Dark Spire (a Wizardry-like made by a Japanese developer, but it does not feel at all like a JRPG).
* Wizardry 4 has such a strong focus on adventure-game style puzzles, to the point where it feels like it's an adventure game disguised as an RPG (and not an easy adventure game, at that). The Dark Spire, which I mentioned above, seems to come from that route with respect to puzzles as well, though the game is more conventional in terms of combat and not as difficult (even if there are still enemy groups that can just say "you lose".) (The one other game that gave me a similar feeling is La Mulana, which definitely qualifies as an action adventure game.)
* Even the Ultima games have a lot of adventure-game style puzzles; this is perhaps strongest in Ultima 4 and 5.
* Mystic Ark (Japan-only sequel of sorts to The 7th Saga (no relation to SaGa)) is another example of a true JRPG/Adventure hybrid, with strong adventure game elements (stronger than you'd see in a typical RPG).

(Note that there are Western-developed JRPGs (Ikenfell is one example), and there are also Japan-developed WRPGs (The Dark Spire would count if you consider early Wizardry to be in that category).)

I didn't include the even more previous Pen & Paper, and Tabletop, RPG precursor genre, since it's not tied to computers at all, but Adventure games hearken back to role-playing as well.
There are two forms of role-play generally, one in which you play out your own role, and one in which you get a predetermined role to play.
CRPG only means Console/Computer RPG. That includes each and every game within the distinct sub-genres. Like dtgreene said, every WRPG is a CRPG, but not every CRPG is a WRPG.

The easiest way to show how the genres have evolved and how they interconnect would be through a 3D cylinder wheel. Can't do that here though.

It should also be noted that Just because a sub-sub-genre exists, doesn't mean it has taken over everything from its parent genre. Roguelites aren't Roguelikes. Not that I think you think that. Others do however.
It's just meant to show that between the parent genre and the sub-genre, there exists gray-zones, and that the parent genres stand on their own, with games in them as well. Be they older or newer.

My bugbear in these kinds of discussions and categorizations is that ARPG have come to stand for several very distinct genres, making it inordinately difficult to find other sub-genres you like.
I absolutely hate Spectacle Fighters like Devil May Cry/Bayonetta for example, but they're often lumped in together with H'n'S games like Diablo/Grim Dawn, which I love..and Borderlands/Hellgate London are also called ARPG, while being looter shooters. Morrowind/Deus Ex have also been known as ARPG, whilst being Immersive Sims.
Then there are games which doesn't fall into a new or existing sub-genre, yet. and simply called ARPG.
H'n'S games are even confused with Roguelites sometimes, like Children of Morta/Hades!
It's also kind of funny how Fallout 2 is a WRPG, while Fallout 3 is an Immersive sim. Perspective does matter sometimes.

You seem to delve down more deeply, and go into more detail and minutiae than is strictly necessary.
That isn't a bad thing, and I'm actually all for it.. as long as it doesn't mess up the more overarching genres and sub-genres.
Weaving chronology, mechanics, and intent together is hard.

1. The computer games come from P&P. But I guess we don't have to delve into non-digital games to keep things simpler, sure.
2. What are you basing the claim that adventure games evolved from RPGs on?
3. Yes though there has to be enough of the typical gameplay elements associated with RPGs for it to quality in the second case, otherwise anything is an RPG.
4. Again what are you basing that claim on? I can see an argument for it in that WRPG was more properly defined in the late 80s or early 90s rather than from the beginning, and in comparison to JRPGs.

The family tree part, whatever shape it takes will be done later. Let's focus on defining the subgenres here.

5. But what is it I'm saying on the page that you disagree with there?

6. Well hey, that is kinda the point here! If I can put an accurate label(s) on each game on the very first line you read about it, you won't run into a spectacle fighter/combo & reflex-based game if you wanted a loot-based and build-based one.
I personally used hack 'n slash as a term for weapon-based beat 'em ups before learning recently of this other definition (which is really a bit different from the original RPG one too since Diablo had its own blend of RPG and action), but using it as a prefix to ARPG here and linking to the subgenres page should help avoid confusion.

When that's mostly done I could make quick lists which feature one subgenre a piece only for quick browsing of each. Or perhaps a spreadsheet like I'm doing with the platform adventure/mv site.

Note that my goal with the site is to cover the '80s-'90s first and foremost, then the '00s and maybe I'll keep it going after that but probably not. So a few of the subgenres here like Survival might not stay.

I'm probably not gonna use immersive sim because it's too vague, the immersion part is too subjective in some ways (referring to the FP perspective here), and it basically just means the game has systemic elements (which has become more of a focus in recent years rather than back in the day it seems) and multiple solutions to problems when it comes to the gameplay, something various non-IS games have. At least that's my impression after having played just the System Shock games and checking some reviews for Ultima Underworld.

Perhaps it is too in-depth for what should be a quick reference guide, it's something I struggle with at times since opinions vary so much on what is and isn't important or which genre a game "really" belongs to. As a rule of thumb I look at the proportions of a gameplay style or mechanic, then the depth of each one.

Changed the wording of a couple of points and added a couple of clarifications on the front page based on feedback elsewhere.