Wowpedia:Peer review

From Wowpedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Peer review is intended to expose articles to closer scrutiny than they might otherwise receive. It is intended for high-quality articles that have already undergone extensive work. If a featured articles section gets implemented the pool of candidates will likely come from those articles which have undergone the peer review process.

Peer review is not intended to create high quality articles, but rather to ensure that high quality articles are in the best possible condition.

To call attention to articles that need extensive work use the {{Cleanup}} tag. If you would simply like feedback on an article or problem use the {{Comment}} tag and/or post a request on the Forum:Wowpedia general.

For a generic guide on writing a good article see Article development on Wikipedia.



Anyone can request to have an article peer reviewed, simply place the {{Peerreview}} tag on the discussion page of the article that you would like to have peer reviewed. This will place the banner at the top of the page as well as add the page to Category:Requests for peer review. Next, come to this page and add a link to the article as well as a short description describing why the page should be peer reviewed to the request for peer review section below. If you request a peer review you should be sure to participate in any discussion occurring during the peer review to ensure it is an active, valuable and communal process.

Responding to a request for peer review

  • Scan the list of requests below, and if one catches your fancy, follow the link to the article and read it. If you think something is wrong with the article—e.g., it's too long, there's no lead section, poor grammar/spelling, factual errors—please post your comments on the articles talk page under Peer Review Comments.
  • If you have the time and knowledge to resolve relatively minor issues in the article itself, this will be appreciated. If you do so, please consider making a note of this on the page to keep others informed about the progress of the article.
  • You may also want to look at the Category:Requests for peer review in case someone forgot to add their article below.

Removing a request

  • To free up the page for active traffic, and to make peer review a more dynamic and valuable process, you are invited to move inactive requests to the current archive link. Inappropriate listings, listings older than a month, and articles that have gone on to be listed as featured article candidates can and should be removed, as well as apparently forgotten requests where the requester has not responded to comments (if you post a request, please do not discourage reviewers by ignoring their efforts). Please see the request removal policy for specifics.
  • After removing the listing from this page, contributors should place {{Oldpeerreview}} in place of the {{Peerreview}} tag on the article's talk page.
  • Next you should archive the peer review discussion to pagename/OldPeerReview.

Removal policy

To keep down list bloat, you are invited to follow the instructions for removing a request and archiving the discussion. Please remove only the following kinds of requests from the list:

  • Requests that aren't appropriate for peer review, for instance requests for help in containing vandalism, resolving an edit war, etc., should be removed promptly, in the interest of the requester, since he/she is unlikely to get adequate response to them here. Please drop a note on the requester's talk page to inform them of the removal and the reasons for it, and try to recommend a better page to list the request. There is no reason to archive the peer review or place the {{Oldpeerreview}} tag on it if this is the reason for removal.
  • Any requests that has not seen any activity for a month.
  • Articles that have gone on to be listed as featured article candidates should also be removed. This currently is not applicable.
  • Requests that have attracted comments from other people, and where the original poster has not responded to these comments within a week, should also be removed. Requesting and then ignoring comments tends to discourage potentially valuable input, and peer review needs to attract more, not less, comments from reviewers. However, please be careful when you decide to remove a listing for this reason! Requesters are encouraged to respond on the peer review page, so as to keep everyone informed of the progress of the article; nevertheless, before removing an apparently unresponsive poster, please check first whether they have perhaps responded somewhere else: on the article's talk page, on the reviewer's talk page, or by editing the article appropriately.

Requests for peer review

Example peer review requests

After adding the {{Peerreview}} tag to the talk page of the article, create a new level 2 heading below this example and ensure that the title is a link to the article. Below the heading type in the reason for your request and sign your comment. Be sure to be active in the peer review process.

Azuremyst Isle -> Quests

I have added all the quests in Ammen Vale, but I have left them marked as Stubs. If someone could review them, make sure I am not missing anything/used incorrect information, and then remove the Stub, it would be appreciated. Thanks User:SeiferTim/Sig 11:23, 2 February 2007 (EST)


I've made numerous edits to the article, and I've done about as much as I can to improve it. I've nominated it for a featured article, and would like others to review and comment on it. --Tyrsenus t c 16:29, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

The Compleat Blacksmith

I've created this along the lines of the simliar page for Engineering. I do not have first-hand experience with all of it, and would appreciate review to correct any blunders and misapprehensions I may have created. --Eirik Ratcatcher 01:10, 18 March 2008 (UTC)


Singificant change in 3.0.2, ithink I've represented it correctly but would appreciate review. Ruprecht (talk) 21:39, 18 October 2008 (UTC)