Wikipedia:Peer review/List of presidents of the Royal Society/archive1

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because it appears complete enough for an featured list review, as per the request here. Thanks, WylieCoyote (talk) 23:17, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I will be doing this... Comments will be up within 24 hours. Looking forward to working with you!
—Michael Jester (talk · contribs) 02:42, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative text needed for the photo.
MOS frowns upon one-sentence paragraphs. I suggest saying how many there has been throughout the Royal Society's history (61 if I counted right)
Second paragraph: should the apostrophes be changed to quotation marks?
"The royal charter also stipulated" -> "The royal charter stipulated"
"St. Andrew's Day (30 November)." Remove the parenthesis somehow.
"patrons of the society and, in 1847," -> "patrons of the society, and, in 1847,"
"chief (albeit informal) advisor" MOS doesn't like parenthesis
"Since the 1870s it has been usual (with a few exceptions)" Same as above. Also, there should be a space between the reference and the start of the sentence.
Paragraph 4: same as a number one. Try to merge into another paragraph.

Suggest changing the section to either "List" or "Presidents". No need to have "of the Royal Society".
Change hyphens to en-dashes
Images need alternative text
Sorting doesn't work for President and Profession columns

Can't verify the majority of the sources, but I trust you, and there are editors who can.
Publisher needed for specific reference 1
For specific reference 2, I need a log-in? Not sure what's up with that. Might have to add {{subscription needed}}
date parameter can be added (23 April 2010) to specific reference number 3
Change 1885 in reference 4 to November 1885
Reference number 5 takes me to the Royal Society's main page. Fix that. Also, is number 2 and number 5 the same reference? If so, refname them.

Not much is wrong, just a little bit. Good work! I believe that once these comments are completed, the article will be FL ready.