[Discussion] Peer Review Templates

[Sedge]

Peer Review Templates?

The idea of peer review templates came up in recent conversation, and I thought I'd see what everyone thought of it. Like CS templates, these would not be mandatory -- if you just want to wing a review, or set it up your own way, templates wouldn't preclude anyone from doing so.

That said, do you guys think having some templates would be helpful? These could be general or specific. For example, here are what I consider the main questions with which to approach any article:

1) Is the article content appropriate to Mizahar? 2) Is the article straightforward and comprehensible? Are there any unclear or confusing elements? 3) Does the article provide enough information that you feel you could comprehensively apply it in play? If a skill article, is it relevant to all skill levels? If not, what aspects are currently lacking?

That right there could be a general template, with an additional heading for grammar/typo review. There could also be more specific templates available for topics like skills and monsters.

What does everyone think? Good idea, bad idea, indifferent? What questions or subjects would you suggest go in a review template? If you were to design a template, what would it be?

[Caelum]

I am in favor of optional review templates because I feel it would result in a larger number of reviewers and therefore expedite the approval process which is notoriously sluggish. The triple question overview you propose is an excellent general use format capable of being applied to any genre of article and would likely be popular with the more knowledgeable and opinionated reviewers on subject. Here are breakdowns for each of the three questions. My suggestion is that in addition to the general template holding all three, there are individual templates for each. They would focus like this: 1. (Is this article content appropriate to Mizahar?) a.k.a The Copy Edit This is the fact checker. It addresses the salient points of the proposed article and assures that they are not in conflict with the existing body of lore. 2. (Is the article straightforward and comprehensible? Are there any unclear or confusing elements?) a.k.a. The Line Edit This is the last line of quality defense for an article to be placed in the wiki. It addresses matters of grammar, punctuation, spelling, consistency and word usage. This is strictly for the polish and appeal, not for content. 3. (Does the article provide enough information that you feel you could comprehensively apply it in play? If a skill article, is it relevant to all skill levels? If not, what aspects are currently lacking?) a.k.a. The Content Edit This is the fine tooth comb that addresses the article's content directly and its impact on the game as a whole. Now that I've listed them, I'm not entirely sure a template for each is actually necessary, but perhaps one specifically for the Line Edit. Additionally, a Content Edit and a Copy Edit are very often done in conjunction with each other for the obvious reasons. Perhaps one template for them both? Anyway, these are my initial thoughts. I am happy to assist, just let me know.

[Sedge]

Seems like we've got mostly crickets in this thread, so clearly templates are not a popular desire. In that case, I'd like to open the floor to discuss reviews more broadly. Reviewers: What is your process for writing reviews? Are there any common pitfalls you see in article drafts? Do you have advice for authors in general? Advice for other reviewers? Everyone Else: If you've never reviewed an article, why not? What would help you to get started on a review?

[Sayana]

I've reviewed a couple of articles in the past and my process looks something like this:

1) Read through carefully and check for ways to make the writing flow better, seem more professional, correct any spelling/grammar, check for consistency of tenses, and remove duplicated/repeated words.

2) While I'm reading through I look for any obvious questions the reader might have, whether the article fits with the general game mechanics of Mizahar (mainly for the skill level descriptions), and overall if it makes sense.

This essentially reflects what you (Sedge) and Caelum have already said. When I'm more knowledgeable on the subject then I might also look for areas in which the article is lacking.

As for advice for authors, sometimes I wonder if people get too bogged down in the details to actually finish articles. Or they don't prioritize articles enough to finish. I know that's sort of where I am at with my own article and I'm trying to better prioritize it to finish it off. It's so tempting to say you're going to work on your article once you've replied to all your threads, but sometimes that just never happens (since people reply back) or if it does, it's only for a day or two that you're without threads to reply to.