User:Isomorphyc/Sandbox/LatinAdjectiveLatentSubstantives

What is the argument for not making Noun headings for substantive uses of adjectives? Is this mainly a space-saving feature of L&S? Can the adjectival derivations just be noted in the etymologies? So far as I can tell, the Wiktionary treatment of these substantives is not consistent and largely favours Noun headings for substantive usages, for example,. A large number of substantives exist in L&S which should be in Wiktionary, but which do not have headwords, and hence were never added, either in their own right or as subsidiary entries as here.

0. Christianus 1. abecedarius 2. aeronauticus 3. ales 4. amnicola 5. anapaestus 6. animalis 7. anularius 8. armiger 9. aurarius 10. austrinus 11. avarus 12. beatus 13. benevolens 14. caelestis 15. calcarius 16. campester 17. capitaneus 18. civilis 19. cognatus 20. coloniarius 21. complures 22. consectaneus 23. consistorianus 24. consocius 25. cubicularius 26. curiosus 27. dulciarius 28. ensifer 29. equester 30. finitimus 31. francus 32. gelidus 33. geminus 34. germanus 35. graecus 36. harenarius 37. incendiarius 38. levis 39. libertinus 40. librarius 41. liquidus 42. masculus 43. mellarius 44. memorialis 45. militaris 46. multicolor 47. naufragus 48. ordinarius 49. paganus 50. palaestricus 51. paradoxus 52. philosophus 53. pigmentarius 54. precativus 55. proximus 56. publicus 57. pulcher 58. quadrupes 59. rebellis 60. rivalis 61. rotundus 62. rusticus 63. saccarius 64. sacerdotalis 65. sacrilegus 66. sagittifer 67. scaenicus 68. scelestus 69. septuagenarius 70. signifer 71. socius 72. sophos 73. sophus 74. supernus 75. triangulus 76. viduus 77. vinaceus 78. vinarius