Wikipedia:Peer review/Guidelines

Wikipedia's peer review is a way to receive ideas on how to improve articles that are already decent. It may be used for potential good article nominations, potential featured article candidates, or an article of any "grade" (but if the article isn't well-developed, please read here before asking for a peer review). Follow the directions below to open a peer review. After that, the most effective way to receive review comments is by posting a request on the talk page of a volunteer.

Nominating
Anyone can request peer review. Editors submitting a new request are encouraged to review an article from those already listed, and encourage reviewers by replying promptly and appreciatively to comments.

Step 1: Prepare the article
For general editing advice see introduction to editing, developing an article, writing better articles, and "The perfect article".

Please note:
 *  Nominations are limited to one open request per editor. 
 * Articles must be free of major cleanup banners
 * Content or neutrality disputes should be listed at requests for comment, and not at peer review.
 * 14 days must have passed since the last peer review of that article.
 * Articles may not be listed for a peer review while they are nominated for good article status, featured article status, or featured list status.
 * Please address issues raised in an unsuccessful GAN, FAC or FLC before opening a PR.
 * For more information on these limits see here.

Step 2: Requesting a review
To add a nomination: Avoid re-editing your own nomination. This makes your nomination disappear from the List of unanswered reviews, resulting in delays in it being picked up by a reviewer. If this has happened, add your peer review to Template:Peer review/Unanswered peer reviews sidebar by clicking. Please consider reciprocity and every time you nominate a review, respond or add to another review (current list here), so that you won't have to wait too long before someone comments on yours.
 * 1) Add  to the top of the article's talk page and save it.
 * 2) Click within the notice to create a new peer review discussion page.
 * 3) Complete the new page as instructed. Remember to say what kind of comments or contributions you want, and/or the sections of the article you think need reviewing.
 * 4) Save the page with the four tildes  at the end of your request to sign it. Your peer review will be automatically listed within an hour.

To change a topic

The topic parameter can be changed by altering the template on an article's talk page. The topic (X) on the template can be set as one of the following: arts · langlit (language & literature) · philrelig (philosophy & religion) · everydaylife · socsci (social sciences & society) · geography · history · engtech (engineering & technology) · natsci (natural sciences & mathematics)

If no topic is chosen, the article is listed with General topics.

Reviews before featured article candidacy

All types of article can be peer reviewed. Sometimes, a nominator wants a peer review before making a featured article nomination. These reviews often wait longer than others, because the type of review they need is more detailed and specialised than normal. There are some things you should know before doing this:
 * Have a look at advice provided at featured articles, and contact some active reviewers there to contribute to your review
 * Please add your article to the sidebar Template:FAC peer review sidebar, and remove when you think you have received enough feedback

Step 3: Waiting for a review
Check if your review is appearing on the unanswered list. It won't if more than a single edit has been made. If you've received minimal feedback, or have edited your review more than once, you can manually add it to the backlog list (see Step 2: Requesting a review, step 6). This ensures reviewers don't overlook your request.

Please be patient! Consider working on some other article while the review is open and remember to watch it until it is formally closed. It may take weeks before an interested volunteer spots your review.

Consult the volunteers list for assistance. An excellent way to get reviews is to review a few other requests without responses and ask for reviews in return.

Your review may be more successful if you politely request feedback on the discussion pages of related articles; send messages to Wikipedians who have contributed to the same or a related field; and also request peer review at appropriate Wikiprojects. Please do not spam many users or projects with identical requests.

Note that requests still may be closed if left unanswered for more than a month and once no more contributions seem likely. See Step 4.

Step 4: Closing a review
To close a review:
 * 1) On the article's talk page, remove the  tag on the article's talk page and replace this with , where N is the number of the peer review discussion page above (e.g. 1 for /archive1).
 * 2) On the peer review page, remove  and replace this with.

When can a review be closed?
 * If you are the nominator, you can close the review at any time, although this is discouraged if a discussion is still active.
 * If the article has become a candidate for good article, featured article or featured list status.
 * If the review is to determine whether an article can be nominated for GA, FA or FL status, and a reviewer believes it has a reasonable chance of passing these, they may close the review and encourage a direct nomination (see here).
 * If a review is answered and the nominator is inactive for more than one week.
 * A full list is available at Peer review/Request removal policy

Closure script
 * There is a script to help automate closing peer reviews. To use the script:
 * Copy  into your Special:MyPage/common.js
 * When you view a review, click on the tab that says "More" and then "Close peer review". The tab can be found near the "History" tab. This should update the article's talk page and the review page.
 * For more details see Wikipedia:Peer review/Tools

Reviewing

 * Select an article on the current list of peer reviews.
 * If you think something is wrong, or could be improved, post a comment on the peer review page.
 * Feel free to improve the article yourself!
 * Interested in reviewing articles of your subject area? Add your name to the volunteer list.

For easier navigation, a list of peer reviews, without the reviews themselves included, can be found here. A chronological peer reviews list (not sorted by topic) can be found here.