Talk:Fellow of the Institute of Physics

List

The list headed "HonFInstP" then giving, after each name, "HonFInstP" is awful, really naff and redundant. That's WHY THOSE PEOPLE ARE LISTED THERE IN THE FIRST PLACE. Good grief. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.109.201.123 (talk) 12:22, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

The article also needs to draw a clearer distinction between the Fellowship and Hon. Fellowship, simply because otherwise the article is effectively devoid of any meaningful content whatever.

Hi, feel free to improve the article, regards Atlantic306 (talk) 17:00, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Don't know a thing about this Institute. Whoever it was that thought it worth making in the first place- and painstakingly added all the vain little post-nominals even though they're not required/ this isn't standard format!- could have put in the effort, surely. As they did not, what we have is what I remarked upon- a virtually worthless article. So it goes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.109.201.123 (talk) 09:43, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

I had ten minutes spare so managed to improve the article from the IoP's own site (which raises the question of why no interested party ever bothered to do so), although the fact that it was necessary for me- entirely unrelated to the Institute or indeed to physics- to have spent the time is mildly bothersome. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.109.201.123 (talk) 10:06, 29 March 2022 (UTC)