 | This is an essay. It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints. |
The purpose of this essay is to elaborate on some of my views regarding peer reviews, mostly for the sake of anyone who might be undergoing one of mine.[note 1] I enjoy the process of peer reviewing because it allows editors to suggest changes rather than impose their views. The "peer review process", as defined in this issue of The Signpost and on WP:PR, is deliberately vague, and I'm fine with that. People will conduct peer reviews in their own way, and there should be plenty of leeway as to which style would work best for a particular article. Reviewers should find a way to merge their personal style with what has been requested.
Cite error: There are <ref group=note> tags on this page, but the references will not show without a {{reflist|group=note}} template (see the help page).