Talk:Galus Sulpicius (consul 4 BC)

Classical Greece and Rome Low‑importance

	This redirect 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 redirect has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Biography: Politics and Government

	Biography portal This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This redirect is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as Low-importance).

Does Galus Sulpicius meet notability standards? If he were a consul ordinaris I'd say yes, but as a suffect I have my doubts. -- llywrch (talk) 05:15, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I would say yes, on the basis that the Augustan suffects were still notable members of the Senate (even though in the case of Galus Sulpicius there is nothing still extant about his career). If we were talking about the suffect consuls from later in the Principate, when there may have been anywhere from six through to twenty in a given year, then there may be a case, but not for this year, when he was only one of two suffects. Oatley2112 (talk) 08:14, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You might be right. However, in the case of many suffect consuls, this was simply a legal step to enable them to hold more responsible governing positions, specifically as consular governors (e.g. Roman Britain) or proconsulates, & since those alone would make an individual notable in those cases the question whether a suffect consul makes one notable is moot. On the other hand, a person being a member of the Roman Senate -- which wasn't so much a legislature or governing body as it was a social class -- isn't notable in itself. Unless all outrageously wealthy people -- even those who inherit their wealth -- are notable; the Senate comprised the wealthiest few hundred Roman citizens, less than even 1% of the population. But since the last couple of times I nominated an article for deletion didn't carry, I'm not interested in trying it with this one. -- llywrch (talk) 18:04, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]