1. [I did some minor copyediting; feel free to revert.] You've got two prose reviews so far; I'll skip that part. [ Nothing is jumping out at me as a prose problem.] I checked sorting on all sortable nonnumeric columns and sampled the links in the table.
2. The lead meets WP:LEAD and defines the inclusion criteria.
3a. The list has comprehensive items and annotations.
3b. The sources appear to be reliable, and the UPSD tool isn't indicating any significant problems (but this isn't a source review). All relevant retrieval dates are present.
3c. The list meets requirements as a stand-alone list, it isn't a content fork, and it doesn't largely duplicate another article (that I can find).
4. It is navigable.
5. It meets style requirements. At a glance, the images seem fine.
