Talk:List of archbishops of Uppsala

	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.

Sweden High‑importance

	Sweden portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sweden, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sweden-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SwedenWikipedia:WikiProject SwedenTemplate:WikiProject SwedenSweden articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Christianity: Lutheranism Low‑importance

	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Lutheranism (assessed as Mid-importance).

Untitled

Hello Uppland. I think you have this on your watchlist?

You wrote: Adding info directly to the list would be more suitable if all that was known was that "John Doe is mentioned as archbishop of Uppsala in papal document so-and-so from year X, but is otherwise unattested"

Yes, you are right. But for once, I slightly disagree with you. When there is only a few paragraphs on a person, I want them to be on a common page to enhance readability. The biggest problem is that these persons are so uninteresting to almost anyone that they don't deserve a separate page.

Do you agree with me? --Fred chessplayer 15:06, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I am undecided about some of the shorter biographies, but a couple of the longer ones could probably become articles of their own. I am not going to do anything about it now; we can see how things develop. I did some formatting with <p>-tags to get the text to align with the indent after the bullets. / Uppland 15:45, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Ok. Notice that all biographies have their own pages but may have been unlinked.

The ideal is that every archbishop has a shorter intro. In that way we can give a coherent "history of Archbishops" to the pages that are by themselves not interesting to most people. --Fred chessplayer 17:33, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Issue two: I think it looks better without the

tags because then the paragraphs are easier to distinguish from the name. Is there a guideline for this? --Fred chessplayer 10:46, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)