Difference between revisions of "Twinsuniverse:Peer Reviews"
From Twinsuniverse
m (3 revisions) |
J McKalling (Talk | contribs) m |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | Peer reviews are a way to guarantee quality to a certain degrees. It basically comes down to others reading an article and comment on them. | + | Peer reviews are a way to guarantee quality to a certain degrees. It basically comes down to others reading an article and comment on them. Thanks to the software running the Twinsuniverse, errors can be fixed immediately. Uncertainties can be discussed in the article's discussion page. |
Try review an article whenever you can. A good idea would be to pick a [[Special:Random|random]] article to review. | Try review an article whenever you can. A good idea would be to pick a [[Special:Random|random]] article to review. | ||
| − | Articles should not only be reviewed on correctness of the content but also on [[:Category: | + | Articles should not only be reviewed on correctness of the content but also on [[:Category:Twinsuniverse - Style|style]]. |
| − | [[Category: | + | [[Category:Twinsuniverse - Style]] |
Latest revision as of 15:26, 3 November 2012
Peer reviews are a way to guarantee quality to a certain degrees. It basically comes down to others reading an article and comment on them. Thanks to the software running the Twinsuniverse, errors can be fixed immediately. Uncertainties can be discussed in the article's discussion page.
Try review an article whenever you can. A good idea would be to pick a random article to review.
Articles should not only be reviewed on correctness of the content but also on style.
