Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Portuguese monarchs/archive1

List of Portuguese monarchs
Partial self-nom. Fine list--Gameiro 00:32, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment, would look better as prettytables, since there are no observations for most of them it looks kind of akward. Also, a little bit of colour in the form of backgrounds on the table or a picture of the current monarch for example would be a fine addition. Phoenix2 04:10, July 13, 2005 (UTC)
 * Portugal is a republic. But thanks for the tips.--Gameiro 23:44, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Support. Also, some of the colours are a little harsh, since that was an issue brought up in List of rivers by length. Phoenix2 16:42, July 15, 2005 (UTC)
 * Support, since there isn't a current King, I put a thumb of the 1st king in the intro. Take it out if you dislike it. Dsmdgold 17:27, July 15, 2005 (UTC)
 * Support, as it now stands -- ALoan (Talk) 12:34, 20 July 2005 (UTC) Comments: Do the colours indicate something?  The tables are also a bit messy - does the first one need the "-" symbols?  And the column widths should be made the same for all of them. Finally, there are no references. -- ALoan (Talk) 19:39, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
 * I suggested background colours to make the table look a little prettier, I don't think they mean anything in particular. Phoenix2 23:18, July 17, 2005 (UTC)
 * Object (but will fix myself sometime soon I hope), the prose has some grammatical errors in and needs copyediting.
 * The "-" symbols were removed and references added. Can someone adjust the column widths? Thanks.--Gameiro 09:55, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Support--Gito 10:09, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose for now. 1) Keep all the tables a fixed width. Its easier to follow when scrolling down 2) The colour combiinations are a little strange. Is it necessary to colour each table? If you want to colour the tables then I have two suggestions. 1) Have all tables monochrome ie. shades of greens or blues. 2) Use colours which are nearby in the colour spectrum eg. VIBGYOR (its an example of the transition of colours, don't use it though) instead of abruptly changing colours for each table. =Nichalp   «Talk»=  18:11, July 19, 2005 (UTC)
 * Thanks for taking care of my objection. Some niggles which I did not catch earlier: 1) The Manual of Style does not recommend wikifying the headings. Instead, what you should do is add a line under each heading such as "The House of ... began in ... and ended with the death of ..." something like that. Just to give you an idea. I'm not looking for detail, just two sentences would be good enough for me to support this list. =Nichalp   «Talk»=  18:13, July 20, 2005 (UTC)
 * I was going to fix this, but I was somewhat confused by the dates here that seem to be slightly different to those in, for example, House of Burgundy, Henry, Count of Portugal, Theresa, Countess of Portugal and Afonso I of Portugal.  Henry, Count of Portugal says that he died and Alfonso became count in 1112, and Alfonso declared himself king in 1139.  According to Afonso I of Portugal, he was an infant aged 3 in 1112, but became an adult (aged 14) in 1123, declared himself king in 1129 and was acclaimed as king by his soldiers in 1139.  Presumably Theresa was regent while her son was a minor, from 1112, but what happened in 1126? And what changed in 1143? -- ALoan (Talk) 10:46, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * The colours are now the same for every dynasty and I've fixed the widths of the tables.--Gameiro 02:06, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Support -- Cyberjunkie | Talk 02:22, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
 * NOTE - although work has been done on the objections, it is not clear whether these points have been fully resolved. I propose keeping this nomination listed for another four days in the hope that the issue will become clearer, jguk 12:37, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Not fully resolved. THe headings shouldn't be wikified. See above. =Nichalp   «Talk»=  15:12, July 25, 2005 (UTC)
 * Support has really improved over the past two weeks --Sophitus 02:08, July 25, 2005 (UTC)
 * Object, problems raised by Nichalp and ALoan need to be addressed. --Spangineer (háblame)  16:10, July 25, 2005 (UTC)
 * The objections raised are now resolved. I've improved every dynasty with an introductory text and transferred the links. The question of the dates is controversial and it's explained in the introductory text of the House of Burgundy. Please, can someone now copyedit the article because my English is a bit lame. Then I believe it could be featured. Thanks for all your objections, they made me work. Gameiro 00:14, 28 July 2005 (UTC)