Wikipedia:BMJ/Reviewer guidelines

BMJ is offering the English Wikipedia community an expert review service for Wikipedia's best medicine articles, with the aim of creating a canonical version of those articles. BMJ has undertaken to find a set of leading experts in the relevant fields to review selected articles and be named as reviewers. Everything in the Wiki world is open and transparent so changes and comments will be visible.

The aim is to have two versions of each reviewed article. The "current" version will be found in Google searches and can be edited and updated. That version will have a prominent badge at the top, linking the reader to the version that has passed BMJ's expert review process. The latter "reliable" version will be locked from editing and will have a unique digital object identifier. We hope it will also be indexed by Medline and other biomedical databases. We expect Wikipedia's reliable version to be justifiably regarded by the public, the professions and the academy as an extremely reliable source that may be cited with confidence.

The reliable version will list the reviewers and link to a page where the reviewers' affiliations and potential competing interests are disclosed.

We expect reviewers to declare any competing interests. A competing interest—often called a conflict of interest—exists when judgment concerning a primary interest (such as a balanced presentation of a topic) may be influenced by a secondary interest (such as financial gain, professional advancement or personal rivalry). We are not aiming to eradicate such interests—they are almost inevitable—but they must be declared.

What is a Wikipedia article?
Good Wikipedia articles are based on high quality independent secondary sources; i.e., systematic reviews published in reputable journals, position statements from professional and scholarly societies, etc.. A Wikipedia article may not advance a position that is not found in such sources.


 * Expression: Language should be simple enough for the average general reader to understand, while avoiding ambiguity.
 * Accuracy and up-to-dateness: All assertions should clearly express the current scholarly and professional consensus. If expert opinion is significantly divided, this should be explained.
 * Comprehensiveness: We try to include at least a summary of all important aspects of a topic.
 * Weight/emphasis: We try to devote space to each aspect of a topic according to its relative importance. Fringe views receive attention commensurate with their level of support in the academic community. Often this means no mention at all.

Wikipedia content is governed by policies and guidelines. The guideline describing the kinds of sources we prefer is: Identifying reliable sources (medicine) (WP:MEDRS). The manual of style for medical articles is Manual of Style/Medicine-related articles (WP:MEDMOS).

Because the "current" version of an article may be edited by anyone at any time, Wikipedia medical articles do not include dosage information.

The review will take place on the article's "talk" page in the form of a conversation between the reviewers and the authors, with the authors editing the article during the conversation. Once the reviewers are satisfied that a version of the article is accurate, comprehensive and up to date, that version becomes the reliable version.