This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related articles
Lloyd's of London received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.
This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
Latest comment: 1 year ago1 comment1 person in discussion
This is an informative article article. However, it leaves the reader hanging a number of times.
“a more formal style of attire” - this seems to be designed for those who are already familiar.
”financial history” - nothing is said about the period before the last quarter of the 20th century.
there are large gaps in the history: again, it is recent other than the two disasters of the early 20th century
“capacity”, “LMX”, etc. - no doubt these are familiar to those in the business that those picking up the Encyclopedia to learn are left wanting.
Editors tend to stay in their silos. Would a musician, a biologist, or an architect find sufficient information or links? Humphrey Tribble (talk) 02:55, 29 April 2023 (UTC)Reply
