Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Roman Emperors/archive2

I have incorporated amendments in order to address the objections raised against the previous failed nomination
(see Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Roman Emperors/archive1).

--JohnArmagh 09:42, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:
1. Section headings should not be wikilinked (see WP:MOS). Use {{main}} instead.
2. An explantion of terms like "Pontifex Maximus" and "Pater Patriae" would be good
3. The Eastern Empire section would benefit from having the same level of information as the rest of the list.
Tompw (talk) 10:09, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

1. Haven't worked out how to integrate that yet

2. Briefly introduced the main titles with wikilinks

3. I agree

--JohnArmagh 11:09, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

comments: no particular value is added by wikilinking every standalone year and year-month. Only year-monty-day should be linked for date reading preferences. Hmains 21:09, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:
1. The term "optimus" could be better translated than "the best"
2. As per Tompw no.2
3. Too much dense CAPITALS in the columns with the latin names. Doesn't make it easy to read.
4. Though consistent and comprehensive, the formatting is uninteresting/dull. The page is not aesthetically pleasing.

Witty lama 15:08, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Lead full of short one-sentence paragraphs. Needs to be expanded and flow. Please supply ISBN (and possibly edition) for the book references. Colin°^Talk 11:22, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

'Oppose due to issues with lead mentioned above, and also complete lack of images. Tompw (talk) 21:22, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Where is there a definition of the word 'list' such that it is mandatory for such to contain images? --JohnArmagh 16:28, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]