Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Scholarly peer review or academic peer review (also known as refereeing) is the process of having a draft version of a researcher's methods and findings reviewed (usually anonymously) by experts (or "peers") in the same field.
Peer review is the evaluation of work by one or more people with similar competencies as the producers of the work . [1] It functions as a form of self-regulation by qualified members of a profession within the relevant field. Peer review methods are used to maintain quality standards, improve performance, and provide credibility.
First, like any restated material, review articles may have errors. In a conflict over what a paper said, the peer-reviewed publication is more authoritative and reliable than a review article's summation of the publication's findings. Second, a review article may summarize later research or findings that shed new light on earlier research.
Articles published in respected peer-reviewed scientific journals are preferred for up-to-date reliable information. Scientific literature contains two major types of sources: primary publications that describe novel research for the first time, and review articles that summarize and integrate a topic of research into an overall view.
Scholarly articles: short papers published in academic journals. They may present original research or review the research of others. Many undergo a process of peer review before publication. Watch two short videos on traditional peer review and a comparison to open peer review. Books and monographs: longer academic or popular works.
I've listed this article for peer review because... Thinking about trying to shepherd this up to GA and possibly FA. All insights welcome, would love to get some feedback on structuring and style - art articles like this require a decent amount of analysis and opinion from critics and art historians, and it can be hard to know how best to incorporate a range of views/opinions/ideas.
Wikipedia's peer review is a way to receive ideas on how to improve articles that are already decent. It may be used for potential good article nominations, potential featured article candidates, or an article of any "grade" (but if the article isn't well-developed, please read here before asking for a peer review).
Reviewing new articles; Peer review, a process for receiving ideas and feedback from other editors about articles; Featured article review and Good article reassessment, information about reviewing Featured Articles and Good Articles to see if they still qualify for that status; Specific user groups which mention reviewing include: Pending ...