Talk:List of censors of the Roman Republic

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Classical Greece and Rome Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors interested in Wikipedia's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page.Classical Greece and RomeWikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeTemplate:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeClassical Greece and Rome articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Sourcing

I compared this list to the names in Broughton's handbook & found that it compared quite closely: I could only find one or two in Broughton that was not here. That leads me to conclude this list is likely complete -- although it's entirely possible an inscription or two since 1952 has been found that adds a name or changes one that is listed here. In any case, I've provided a firm base for the next editor to improve upon, & maybe make this article into a Featured List. -- llywrch (talk) 22:05, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Consuls who held the Census prior to the Censors, the chunky table, missing censors and Suolahti

I have a few questions and suggestions in regards to this article, which i would like to vent and discuss here prior to doing major changes to the article.

1. The addition of the consuls who held the census prior to the introduction of the censorship, as provided by Suolahti in The Roman Censors: A Study on Social Structure from 1963 and by Broughton. This should probably be added in a table prior to the current table on censors and be made clear that these are not in official terms "censors" similar to the "censors" of Agrippa and Augustus in the late 1st century BC.

2. Reworking the currently chunky table that is quite...not user friendly (or at least i can barely figure out how to make small or simple changes within it). Sure, it looks good, but we want the ordinary and inexperienced editors to be able to contribute in an easy and accessible way. To this should probably a few references be added or a note saying where the majority of the names are taken from unless noted by something different.

3. Adding a discussion on missing censors as provided by Suolahti with a new section containing "uncertain" censors together with the different evidences surrounding them.

Would like some feedback or comments before i start tackling this so that we, the editors, are at least to some degree in agreement. But of course if no one adds to this in a while i will assume the silence as a sort of "OK".

CutieyKing (talk) 06:51, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sourcing 61 BC

A disclaimer should be added for the censors of 61 BC and just state we don't know who they were. Currently it states that they were Lucius Julius Caesar and Gaius Scribonius Curio. However, there are no primary sources for who the censors were in 61 BC and the references to the compiled list of Broughton sheds no further light on it. I will edit the table accordingly. Akaricloud (talk) 03:26, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]