Talk:Patrologia Latina

Table of contents
I added the table of contents and would see more sense in the linking of notable authors from this table instead of separate list (as the article has now). If no one objects I probably will start doing it some time. → Aethralis 14:46, 14 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I think this would be an improvement. You might find this list easier to work from: . Rwflammang (talk) 15:46, 14 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Yeah that would be better. Originally the list was anyone I could find who had an article here, who were much fewer in number at the time. Adam Bishop (talk) 17:22, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Is the Table of Contents complete? I know the PL takes up much of a wall in the library so it seems like there must be more authors in it. Adam Bishop (talk) 00:42, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
 * It is nearly complete, excluding but the most obscure authors. Here is the complete TOC. I think it would be wise to add some of these as they gain articles in wikipedia, but as for now most of the unnamed ones do not have any. → Aethralis 09:20, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

The reference of Victorinus seems to be incorrect. In fact it connects to Victorinus Imperator rather than to Victorinus Petavionensis Episcopus.I did not make any correction: please, verify. Does really Marcus Valerius Probus belong to the PL Volume 130? Bepimela (talk) 22:26, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
 * You are quite right. Deleted. → Aethralis 19:39, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

More redlinks
It would be worth adding links for all the authors, I think. I was in effect able to construct articles of some sort for all those present in the ToC as given here. The conclusion is that the criteria for being in the Table were adequate. We could afford to have the other authors there, now. Charles Matthews (talk) 10:11, 10 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I agree. I don't think we need the "notable authors" section anymore...everyone can be in the table, red-links or not. Adam Bishop (talk) 11:15, 11 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I agree also. → Aethralis 20:55, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree. Iblardi (talk) 21:55, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Pelagius?
I assume that link should read Pope Pelagius, not Pelagius himself? I'm not 100% certain, so figured I'd ask... Sherurcij (speaker for the dead) 20:07, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
 * If you mean volume 21, that one does have a bibliographical note about Pelagius 'of Britain' . Iblardi (talk) 20:46, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Dionysius of Alexandria
Any particular reason why he is mentioned twice for volumes 3-5. Are his works really included in these volumes? Why is he considered a Latin father? Rwflammang (talk) 20:00, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
 * this was noted in 2009, and he was still mentioned twice now. I have removed the duplication. He is in PL with some letters, I suppose either because he wrote them in Latin, or because they have only been preseved in Latin. --dab (𒁳) 14:06, 15 July 2015 (UTC)