Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Prince-elector/archive1

Prince-elector
Self nomination. The painting used was previously uploaded by another user; I uploaded the other two images from the German Wikipedia, which asserts that both are in the public domain. -- Emsworth 01:42, Jul 2, 2004 (UTC)
 * Looks good to me. The first image is a bit dark, but it's obvious the original painting is dark also...we're better off with it than without it, to borrow a phrase from Ann Landers. Jwrosenzweig 17:27, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * I agree with Jwrosenzweig about the pictures, but it's an excellent article. I've just added a link to List of Reichstag participants (1792) in the last section, as the content is very closely related, but it's a fantastic article; good job! -- OwenBlacker 18:22, Jul 2, 2004 (UTC)
 * Support. James F. (talk) 21:33, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Query: "The German monarchy has since time immemorial theoretically been elective rather than hereditary." &mdash; is it possible to be more precise? "since time immemorial" means "reaching beyond the limits of memory, tradition or recorded history" (dictionary.com); surely that can't be verifiable? &mdash; Matt 16:12, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * I don't know what the precise meaning is in German law, but in English law I believe it means "since before the time of King Richard I" i.e. 1189-1199. -- Arwel 16:49, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * I've removed the phrase "time immemorial." -- Emsworth 15:04, Jul 5, 2004 (UTC)
 * Object: Some years (or rough periods in history) are needed in the lead section. &mdash; Matt 16:33, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Support. Object. I don't know much about the topic, but it's very well-written and seems comprehensive. One thought: the topic covers over six hundred years of history, and the article goes into quite some detail at points (which is great) &mdash; because of this, one thing that might help a reader to get the overall picture would be a timeline / chronology. Would this be worth adding? &mdash; Matt 22:30, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * I don't agree with the idea; a timeline would, for the most part, be a repetition of the "Composition" section. -- 16:37, Jul 7, 2004 (UTC)
 * Hmm...maybe; I've "unobjected" &mdash; my thought was it might be an easier way for a reader to get a grip on the entire chronology of the topic, complementing the "Composition" section (700 words long), and the events mentioned in the other sections. &mdash; Matt 16:51, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)