Wikipedia: Peer review


May 28, 2022

On this page, Wikipedia users can request peer reviews for articles they have edited a lot. The main goal of peer review is to improve the quality of articles. The evaluation is expected to receive so much feedback and suggestions for improvement from other users that the article will eventually have a good chance of getting into the recommended articles or recommended lists. Before an article can be nominated as a recommended article or list, it must be peer-reviewed for at least two weeks. There is no deadline for the duration of the peer review, but the evaluation can still be completed once the necessary additions and corrections have been made in accordance with the feedback, and no further suggestions for improvement have been received for four weeks.


Making a request

Anyone can request a peer review on this page. The article for which this quality assessment is requested should already be a long, multi-paragraph length. However, the article does not have to be “finished” for some status, but a peer review can also be requested for an article that still needs to be improved. If possible, identify the areas that you think are most in need of improvement. Be prepared to edit the article as suggested so that the suggestions are really helpful. It can be useful to tell you what the purpose of the peer review is: for example, to aim for a certain level of quality, to improve a quality-labeled but problematic article so that the quality label does not have to be removed, or just to improve the article. Paste the new request at the top of the list. Attach the peer review template {{peer review}} to the article. It looks like this on the page:

How to respond to a request

Explore the list of articles below and choose the one you like. Read the article and consider what could be improved: Is the article too short or long, is its structure logical, is the facts of the article correct, is it well worded and is there enough, etc. Add your comments on this page under the heading. If the edit suggestion is trivial and / or you have time to correct, please also let us know on this page that you have edited that section of the article. To make it easier to follow the progress of the article, add a note to the peer review page about the edits you made based on the comments.

Closing the peer review

The peer opener can close the peer review once he or she thinks it has met its objectives. After four weeks of requesting an evaluation without new comments, it is recommended that the evaluation be terminated in any case. However, if you want, you can first add the following warning to the end of the conversation (you can also edit it if you wish): [[Image: Out of date clock icon 2.svg | 28px]] , unless there are new comments. - ~~~~ At the end of the review, delete the peer review discussion from this page and move it as an archived article to the discussion page under the heading Archived Peer Review. If there have been peer reviews in the past, number the title in Arabic numerals (Archived Peer Review 2). The first peer review can also be numbered 1. The {{Archived Part}} template can be used for archiving as follows: Use the template {{Article History}} to add the correct {{Article Event}} to the article's discussion page: Fill in the article title, review dates, and perlink ("oldid"). The perink link is copied from the end of the url of the page that opens from the "Permalink" link in the "Tools" link menu on the left side of the article page. Remove {{Peer Review}} - Template from the beginning of the article. Once the peer review is complete after at least two weeks, the article can take over