Wikipedia:WikiProject Firearms/Peer review

Instructions

Requesting a review

1. Add peer-review=yes to the {{WPGUNS}} project banner at the top of the article's talk page and save the page. See the project banner instructions for more details on the exact syntax.
2. Once the page is saved, click on the "request has been made" link that appears in the project banner. This will create a new page on which to discuss the review of the article.
3. Place === [[Name of nominated article]] === at the top.
4. Under the heading created above, compose a short essay explaining your reason for nominating the article. Remember to sign your comments by using four tildes (~~~~).
5. Add a link to the newly created peer review page to the top of the list of peer review requests below.

Commenting

Project members are heavily encouraged to comment on the review process, but the process is open to all interested parties. To comment on an article, please add a new section (using ==== Your user name ====) for your comments, in order to keep multiple responses legible.

Archiving

Reviews should be archived after being inactive for some time, or when the article is nominated as a featured article candidate. Typically if an article's review has had no comments for 30 days, the review should be archived. To archive a review:

1. Move (do not copy) the existing peer review subpage to an archive subpage (e.g. [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Firearms/Peer review/Name of nominated article/Name of achive]]). The exisiting peer review page will become a redirect to the archive.
2. Replace peer-review=yes with old-peer-review=yes in the {{WPGUNS}} project banner template at the top of the article's talk page
3. Remove the link to the peer review page below and place a link to the archived review on the peer review archive page.

Subsequent reviews

To request subequent peer reviews (second, third, forth, ect.), simply follow the directions above for requesting a new peer review. The difference will be that instead of creating a new review page, you will edit the exisiting redirect to the archive into a new review request. Exisiting reviews should be archived as perscribed above before proceeding with a new peer review request.