Talk:Dionysius Exiguus/Comments

Comments for the article to better it:

Everything about him is centered on what he accomplished for the Anno Domini and the calendar/Easter table. More about his early life would be beneficial.
Future adoptance of his model would be wounderful.
What about the views on his model? Did the pope react well to the new version?
In he himself stated that the "present year" was "the consulship of Probus Junior [Flavius Probus]", should the last parentheses be a wikilink?
Is not at the request of Pope John. necessary to mention?
An example of the tables in the Easter tables section would clarify the details given as it is tough to figure out by not seeing the arguments how to imagine them.
Some of the facts in the Easter tables section should be better referenced in my opinion (like footnoted to help the reading).

He ignored the existing tables used by the Church of Rome, which were prepared in 457 by Victorius of Aquitaine, complaining that they did not obey Alexandrian principles, without actually acknowledging their existence, for example.
(however, they were used in the Byzantine Empire, in Greek), this too. Lincher 20:38, 21 August 2006 (UTC)