Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Wikipedia's peer review process is a feature where an editor can receive feedback from others on how to improve an article they are working on, or receive advice about a specific issue queried by the editor. The process helps users find ways for improvement that they themselves didn't pick up on. Compared to the real-world peer review process ...
Featured articles are considered to be some of the best articles Wikipedia has to offer, as determined by Wikipedia's editors. They are used by editors as examples for writing other articles. Before being listed here, articles are reviewed as featured article candidates for accuracy, neutrality, completeness, and style according to our featured ...
Examples include literature reviews or systematic reviews found in medical journals, specialist academic or professional books, and medical guidelines or position statements published by major health organizations. A tertiary source summarizes a range of secondary sources.
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).
Peer review is the evaluation of work by one or more people with similar competencies as the producers of the work (peers). [1] It functions as a form of self-regulation by qualified members of a profession within the relevant field. Peer review methods are used to maintain quality standards, improve performance, and provide credibility.
A review article is an article that summarizes the current state of understanding on a topic within a certain discipline. [1][2] A review article is generally considered a secondary source since it may analyze and discuss the method and conclusions in previously published studies. It resembles a survey article or, in news publishing, overview article, which also surveys and summarizes ...
Good articles meet a set of minimum standards (the Good article criteria) for quality of writing, factual accuracy and attribution, broadness of coverage, stability, and appropriate use of images. This guideline provides advice on how to review fairly against these criteria and hence decide whether to list a nomination as a Good article.
Good articles in Wikipedia A good article (GA) is a Wikipedia article that meets a core set of editorial standards, the good article criteria, passing through the good article nomination process successfully. They are well-written, contain factually accurate and verifiable information, are broad in coverage, neutral in point of view, stable, and illustrated, where possible, by relevant images ...