Memory Alpha:Peer review

The peer review process on Memory Alpha is a way to flag down archivists to help further improve already good articles. All contributors are invited to participate in this process.

Requesting a peer review
To request a peer review for a section of an article, or the entire article, follow these steps:
 * 1) Place the template peerreview on top of the section you want to be peer reviewed. For an entire article, place at the top of the of the article below any disambiguations and sidebar.
 * 2) Create a new section on the talk page using the title "Peer review", or an alternate title of your choice. See here for instructions on how to use alternate titles with the template.

While everyone is invited to improve the article, requesting a peer review first and foremost means that you are willing to actively participate in the process by responding to and resolving issues brought up on the talk page.

Please do not request a peer review if the article still has obvious flaws. In that case, consider using one of the pages needing attention procedures instead. Also, do not request a peer review if you don't plan to play an active role in the process.

Removing requests
Removing the template from the article can happen as quickly as feedback is received, and this should generally be done by the archivist who requested the peer review. If a peer review hasn't generated any feedback for awhile, the template should be removed.

Current peer reviews
noresultsheader=:Currently there are no peer reviews active. namespace= uses=Template:peerreview format =
 * Please note that new reviews may not show up until either someone modifies this page or the cache is purged. To purge the cache, click here.