Template:Peer reviewed
From Wikinews, the free news source you can write!
 |
This page is an official policy on the English Wikinews. It has wide acceptance among editors and is considered a standard that all users should follow. When editing this page, please ensure that your revision reflects consensus. When in doubt, discuss first on the talk page. |
Contents |
Description
This template is used to advertise on an article's talk page the result of a review. It is designed to be simple to use, yet informative.
Please consider returning an article to {{develop}}ment with a comment on additional work needed prior to review, and notifying the original contributor, if you do not go through all the steps of the review process. A copy of the develop template with any parameters will display in red, and should ideally be placed at the top of the article to draw attention to it.
Use [Using Easy Peer Review]
- First of all, make sure you are an editor, or this won't work. Also make sure you are on a page that is currently up for review (has {{review}} on it). You will also need to have javascript enabled for this to work (which you probably already have).
- Find the review tab. This should be on the drop down menu in vector (See image on right), or a tab on the top of the page in monobook (beside the history tab).
- If all else fails, you can also get to it by typing
javascript:Bawolff.review.start()in the address bar and hitting enter. (This will work even if the article is not up for review, so make sure that the article is up for review before doing that.) If that doesn't work, it means the gadget did not load properly, in which case, notify user:Bawolff. - A form should popup (See image for example). Fill it out, hit submit and the gadget should take care of the rest.
Use [manual]
- Note, its recomended you use the EasyPeerReview method above instead.
{{peer reviewed
|revid=Revision ID
|copyright=Status
|newsworthy=Status
|verifiable=Status
|npov=Status
|style=Status
|reviewer=Your Username
|comments=Any Comments, ~~~~
|time=~~~~~}}
Revision ID is the number of the revision that has been reviewed. This is obtained from the History page of an article — it is the number after "oldid" in the current revision in the URL.
Status is pass for a passed section, n/a for not reviewed, or comments for a failed section.
- Copyright: The reviewer should check that the text and images are not copyright infringement.
- Newsworthiness: The reviewer should check that the article agrees with our content guide and is newsworthy.
- Verifiability: The reviewer should check that all information in the article is fully sourced, (using multiple independent sources is strongly encouraged) or has adequate Original Reporting notes.
- Neutral Point of View: The reviewer should check that all information in the article is written in a neutral and unbiased manner, with no editorial commentary/advocacy or unsourced opinion.
- Style: The reviewer should check that all information in the article complies with our style guide (on dateline, grammar and spelling, "inverted pyramid" structure, tone, wikilinks, categories, headline... etc.)
- Note After placing this on the talk page, you must still remove {{review}} from the article and add {{publish}}, sight the article, create a redirect to the article with a 5 digit number in the title, add {{Google News}} to that redirect, and sight the redirect. Its highly recomended you use Easy Peer review, because then you do not have to do all these additional steps.
Examples
A Passed article would look like:
{{peer reviewed|revid=12345|copyright=pass|newsworthy=pass|verifiable=pass|npov=pass|style=pass|reviewer=Skenmy|comments=A very good article! --~~~~|time=~~~~~}}
 |
Revision 12345 of this article has been reviewed by Skenmy (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 21:19, 21 August 2008 (UTC).
Comments by reviewer: A very good article! --Skenmy talk 21:19, 21 August 2008 (UTC) The article may be switched from {{Review}} to {{Publish}}, if it has not already been done. |
A Failed article would look like:
{{peer reviewed|revid=12344|copyright=pass|newsworthy=pass|verifiable=Many claims are not backed up by sources|npov=Appears to be biased|style=pass|reviewer=Skenmy|comments=Otherwise a very good article. --~~~~|time=~~~~~}}
 |
Revision 12344 of this article has been reviewed by Skenmy (talk · contribs) and has failed its review at 21:19, 21 August 2008 (UTC).
Comments by reviewer: Otherwise a very good article. --Skenmy talk 21:19, 21 August 2008 (UTC) The article should be switched from {{Review}} to {{tasks|src|npov|re-review}}, if it has not already been done, and these issues should be addressed. It is recommended that the appropriate templates be added to the article itself, if applicable. This talk page should be updated with subsequent reviews. |
