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, civile. 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