Peer Review

36 Entries in Review

Peer Review | Edited Guide Writing Workshop | Alternative Writing Workshop
Flea Market | Updating an Approved Entry

Welcome to Peer Review, one of several Review Forums on h2g2. Peer Review is the part of h2g2 where you, the Community, help us to decide which Entries go into the Approved version of the site. The Peer Review process has four main steps:

  1. Write Your Entry - a Researcher writes an Entry that is suitable for the Edited Guide: the Approved version of h2g2.

  2. Submit Your Entry - the Researcher submits their Entry to Peer Review.

  3. Read Others' Comments - other Researchers comment on the Entry and help the author to improve it.

  4. Get Accepted - the Entry is Picked by a Scout, accepted by the h2g2 Guide Editors and heads off for inclusion in the Approved version of the site.

Peer Review is not the place for Entries that are unfinished, works in progress, rants, fiction, one-liners, jokes or personal theories.

Writing an Entry

If you're writing an Entry for Peer Review, it needs to be suitable for inclusion in the Approved part of the site. You can be sure of this by following our Writing Guidelines. Essentially, this means it should be truly well written, factual and informative. If your entry doesn't fit the guidelines but you'd still like to submit it, the Alternative Writing Workshop is the best place for the job.

You should check that your chosen subject isn't already covered by an existing Approved Entry1. You can do this by searching h2g2. If you would like to update an existing Approved Entry, you'll need to follow the procedure for Updating an Approved Entry.

You should make sure that the Entry is, as far as you are concerned, finished. If you're looking for a few final comments on an Entry that you haven't quite finished, or you would like others to contribute to your unfinished Entry, you might want to submit it to the Writing Workshop. Alternatively, just keep working on it until you're done, then submit it to Peer Review.

Submitting an Entry to Peer Review

Before submitting an Entry, make sure it fulfils the above requirements. To put an entry into Peer Review, click on the SUBMIT FOR REVIEW link to the right-hand column of the Entry and follow the instructions, choosing 'Peer Review' from the drop-down menu. If you cannot find the SUBMIT FOR REVIEW link, check that the 'Not for Review' box (visible when working on the Entry) isn't ticked.

Approved Entries, Help Pages, Personal Spaces, Entries already in a Review Forum and entries labelled 'Not for Review' cannot be submitted. Also, we'd ask that you don't submit other Researchers' Entries unless you've got a good reason.

Once you've submitted your Entry to Peer Review, it will stay there for at least seven days before a Scout can pick it. This allows time for Researchers to make comments and for you to make any changes recommended. If it looks like you'll need to make major changes to your Entry, the best thing to do is to take it out of Peer Review and resubmit it when it's ready.

Commenting in Peer Review

Before commenting on an Entry in Peer Review, you'll need to read the entry. To do this, click on the title in the list at the bottom of this page.

Once you've read the Entry, don't click on START A CONVERSATION at the bottom of the entry. Instead, click the 'Currently In: Peer Review' link on the right-hand side of the Entry. This will take you to the Peer Review comment thread, where you can add your comments by clicking 'Reply' to the last posting.

Before you comment on an entry in Peer Review, consider the following points:

  • Is it the author's first Entry? (You can check their Personal Space to find out). If so, be gentle in your criticism - if they're really going wrong you may wish to direct them to the Writing Guidelines. Remember, everyone wrote their first Entry once!

  • Have you checked the comments other Researchers have made? If you have spotted a mistake or omission, it might already have been pointed out by someone else.

  • If you like the Entry - say so! Everyone likes compliments.

  • Simply posting 'I hated this, it's rubbish' doesn't give the author much of a clue what they may be doing wrong. If you don't like it, try to make your criticism specific.

  • Wherever possible, try to help the Researcher get the grammar and spelling as accurate as possible. While we have volunteer Sub-editors who polish entries before publication, it never hurts to get the Entry as 'right' as possible early on. This will also help your chances of having the Entry Approved.

  • Ask yourself if you actually understand the Entry. Approved Entries are aimed, in the main, at the educated layman, so if you didn't understand it, it may be a failing of the author. On the other hand, it might well be you, so don't be afraid to tactfully ask for an explanation.

  • Try not to head off on tangents or drift away from discussion of the entry. If there's a burning need to debate anything other than the Entry, please start another Conversation elsewhere.

  • Stay subscribed to the thread; once you've commented, keep an eye on what others are saying. It may be the start of an interesting Conversation.

  • If the Entry gets picked – particularly if it is the author's first – pop back and congratulate the author.

Having Your Entry Accepted

Once your Entry has been in Peer Review for seven days, it can be Picked by a Scout for inclusion in the Approved Guide. Scouts will only pick Entries that have no outstanding corrections, so it's useful to point out when you've made any changes and are happy with your Entry as it stands. The time taken for an Entry to be picked varies hugely, so do be patient.

If you'd like to know about the next stage in the editorial process after a Scout has Picked your Entry, then check out What happens after my Entry has been Picked by a Scout?

1It's also worth checking if there's already an Entry on the topic in Peer Review or if another Researcher is in the process of writing on the same subject, thus giving you the opportunity to put together a collaborative Entry.

Bookmark on your Personal Space

Entries in Review

Subject Author Date Entered Last Posted
A87887722 - 'Hopes and Fears' - a Novel by Charlotte Yonge SashaQ - happysad - Editor 3 Hours Ago 3 Hours Ago
A87887650 - Legoland, Windsor, Berkshire, UK Bluebottle 2 Days Ago Yesterday
A87887209 - A Beginner's Guide to Curry h2g2 Guide Editors 4 Days Ago 4 Days Ago
A87887461 - Challenges Aren't Fun ZildoggoX Last Week 4 Days Ago
A87887191 - The Jaguar XJ13 - the Racer that Never Was SashaQ - happysad - Editor 2 Weeks Ago 2 Weeks Ago
A87886138 - The Ultimate Blue Sky Studios Animated Film Guide: 2002-2009 Bluebottle 3 Weeks Ago 3 Weeks Ago
A87887092 - Jaguar - a Car Manufacturer Born to Perform? SashaQ - happysad - Editor 3 Weeks Ago 3 Weeks Ago
A87887182 - The Contemporary Relevance of George Orwell's 1984 minorvogonpoet 3 Weeks Ago 3 Weeks Ago
A87887100 - Waterworld Bluebottle 3 Weeks Ago 3 Weeks Ago
A87886507 - Waterworld Bluebottle 3 Weeks Ago 3 Weeks Ago
A87887164 - Thoreau-ly Original: Henry David Thoreau and the New England Pencil Dmitri Gheorgheni 3 Weeks Ago 3 Weeks Ago
A87887083 - 'Star Trek' Characters - Guinan Galaxy Babe - spaghettified editor 4 Weeks Ago 3 Weeks Ago
A87887119 - Plants for Pussycats ZildoggoX 4 Weeks Ago 3 Weeks Ago
A87885571 - 'Calbourne' – the Isle of Wight Steam Railway's Flagship Tank Engine Bluebottle 4 Weeks Ago 4 Weeks Ago
A87886868 - Jane Addams and the Devil Baby: Fake News, 1913 Style Dmitri Gheorgheni 5 Weeks Ago 5 Weeks Ago
A87886516 - The Great Disappointment of 1844: Millerites and Fake News Dmitri Gheorgheni 5 Weeks Ago 2 Weeks Ago
A87885788 - 'The Scandalous Lady W' - the BBC Drama Bluebottle Mar 2, 2017 Mar 6, 2017
A87885256 - 'Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines' - the Film Bluebottle Feb 23, 2017 4 Weeks Ago
A87885283 - 'The Persuaders!' - The TV Series SashaQ - happysad - Editor Feb 18, 2017 Last Week
A87884725 - New Year's Resolutions Bluebottle Feb 13, 2017 Mar 6, 2017

Review Forum

Write an Entry

"The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy is a wholly remarkable book. It has been compiled and recompiled many times and under many different editorships. It contains contributions from countless numbers of travellers and researchers."

Write an entry
Read more