Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
This page contains short guides and advice for reviewing various types of articles as part of new pages patrol.Where the main instructions page focuses on a mechanical view of how to process an article, this page summarizes key things to look out for on specific types of articles, as well as resources and likely outcomes.
If the article is considered only partially compliant or non-compliant with the good article criteria, provide a review on the review page detailing what criteria it does not meet and state what is needed to bring the article up to standard. This is the recommended procedure for typical nominations.
Choose an article that you would like to review. Start the review by following the start review link appearing on the GA nominations page or near the top of the article talk page. A new GA review page will be created. You may add opening remarks, an initial review, or one of these templates to the bottom of this review page. [g] Save the page.
The topic of the article must be notable: it must have in-depth coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the topic. If you are connected to the topic, don't write about it. Find another topic instead. Make sure there isn't already an article about the topic. The article you write must include citations to the sources you used.
Reviewing new articles; Peer review, a process for receiving ideas and feedback from other editors about articles; Featured article review and Good article reassessment, information about reviewing Featured Articles and Good Articles to see if they still qualify for that status; Specific user groups which mention reviewing include: Pending ...
A review article is an article that summarizes the current state of understanding on a topic within a certain discipline. [1] [2] A review article is generally considered a secondary source since it may analyze and discuss the method and conclusions in previously published studies.
If the article does not meet the Good article criteria after the reviewer has waited a reasonable amount of time for the nominator to make improvements, the reviewer is sure to fail the nomination. Future article editors may benefit from review comments on how to improve the article. The nominator disagrees with the reviewer.
An article cannot be officially promoted until a reviewer has given their approval (or ) to at least one of the article's hooks. Nominators are encouraged to work with reviewers to come up with hooks that meet the standards of the DYK process, and new alternate hooks can be proposed by anyone (nominator, reviewer, other third party) in an ...