WikiProject Architecture's Peer review process exposes articles to closer scrutiny from a broader group of editors, and is intended for high-quality articles that have already undergone extensive work, often as a way of preparing a featured article candidate. The primary objective is to encourage better articles by having contributors who may not have worked on articles to examine them and provide ideas for further improvement.
The peer review process is highly flexible and can deal with articles of any quality; however, requesting reviews on very short articles may not be productive, as there is little for readers to comment on.
For general editing advice, see Wikipedia style guidelines, Wikipedia how-to, "How to write a great article", and "The perfect article". Articles that need extensive basic editing should be directed to Pages needing attention, Requests for expansion or Cleanup, and content or neutrality disputes should be listed at Requests for comment.
Anyone can request peer review. The best way to get lots of reviews is to reply promptly and appreciatively on this page to any comments. If you post a request, please do not discourage reviewers by ignoring their efforts. Your review may be more successful if you politely request feedback on the discussion pages of related articles and/or send messages to Wikipedians who have contributed to the same or a related field.
WikiProject peer reviews
A Wikipedia Peer Review can be a useful way to improve articles associated with this WikiProject.
You can keep track of new reviews by watching this page; do that by clicking here. If your project has article alerts enabled, reviews will display on that list too.
To list your review below:
- Create the peer review following instructions here.
- Add
[[Wikipedia:Peer review/Name of nominated article/archiveN]] - November 2024at the top of the list of requests below (where N is the archive number).
When the review is finished:
- Follow the general instructions for peer reviews here.
- Move
[[Wikipedia:Peer review/Name of nominated article/archiveN]] - MONTH - YEARfrom the list of active reviews to the list of old reviews.
To change how your project's peer reviews are managed, see here.
How to respond to a request
- Review one of the articles below. If you think something is wrong—e.g., article length, the lead section, poor grammar/spelling, factual errors—post a comment in the article's section on this page.
- Feel free to correct the article yourself. Please consider noting your edits here to keep others informed about the article's progress.