Template:PR-instructions

Wikipedia's Peer review process exposes articles to closer scrutiny from a broader group of editors, and is intended for high-quality articles that have already undergone extensive work, often as a way of preparing a featured article candidate. It is not academic peer review by a group of experts in a particular subject, and articles that undergo this process should not be assumed to have greater authority than any other.

For feedback on articles that are less developed, use the article's talk page or requests for feedback.

For general editing advice, see Wikipedia style guidelines, Wikipedia how-to, "How to write a great article", and "The perfect article". Articles that need extensive basic editing should be directed to Pages needing attention, Requests for expansion or Cleanup, and content or neutrality disputes should be listed at Requests for comment.

The path to a featured article

1. Start a new article
2. Develop the article
3. Check against the featured article criteria
4. Get creative feedback ←
5. Apply for featured article status
6. Featured articles

Nomination procedure

Anyone can request peer review. The best way to get lots of reviews is to reply promptly and appreciatively on this page to any comments. If you post a request, please do not discourage reviewers by ignoring their efforts.

While not required it is strongly encouraged that users submitting new peer review requests choose an article from those already listed to peer review. Preference should be given to those articles which have been listed the longest with little or no response (not including automated peer reviews).

To add a nomination:

1. Place {{peerreview}} at the top of the article's talk page, creating a peer review notice to notify other editors of the review.
2. Within the notice, click "request has been made" to open a new discussion page.
3. Place ===[[ARTICLE NAME]]=== at the top, with the name of your article in the link brackets, and then note the kind of comments/contributions you want, and/or the sections of the article you think need reviewing. Sign with four tildes (~~~~) and save the new page.
4. Edit this page here, pasting {{Wikipedia:Peer review/ARTICLE NAME}} at the top of the list of nominees.

Your review may be more successful if you politely request feedback on the discussion pages of related articles and/or send messages to Wikipedians who have contributed to the same or a related field. You may wish to request peer review on the appropriate Wikiproject; the request will automatically be listed here as well.

How to respond to a request

• Review one of the articles below. If you think something is wrong—e.g., article length, the lead section, poor grammar/spelling, factual errors—post a comment in the article's section on this page. If you create a subsection within a review for your comments, please do not link your username: it is easily confused with an article title.
• Feel free to correct the article yourself. Please consider noting your edits here to keep others informed about the article's progress.

How to remove a request
In accordance with the Peer review request removal policy, you may remove to the current archive any

• inactive listings or listings older than one month,
• inappropriate or abandoned listings (where the nominator has not replied to comments)
• articles that have become featured article candidates

After removing the listing, contributors should replace the {{peerreview}} tag on the article's talk page with {{oldpeerreview}}.

How to resubmit a request
If your request has been removed, please feel free to renominate it for peer review at a later time:

1. Move the old peer review page to [[Wikipedia:Peer review/ARTICLE NAME/Archive1]]
2. Edit [[Wikipedia:Peer review/ARTICLE NAME]], removing the redirect, and insert [[Wikipedia:Peer review/ARTICLE NAME/Archive1]] as a link to the archived discussion.
3. Place {{Wikipedia:Peer review/ARTICLE NAME}} at the top of the list of nominees below.

• Current archive: April 2007

Purge server cache