Thread:Review process templates (1)

Hi folks,

so may I suggest a list of templates (assuming that they don't already exist):


 * 1) review requested (author seeking review; adding the template would add the article to the template page where volunteer reviewers would pick it up)
 * 2) Reviewer one committed (added by first reviewer; template should include an anticipated completion date)
 * 3) Reviewer two committed (added by second reviewer; template should include an anticipated completion date)
 * 4) Reviewer three committed (added by third reviewer; template should include an anticipated completion date; this template should trigger removal of 'review requested' template and addition of 'under review' template; can this be automated?)
 * 5) under review
 * 6) review submitted (could be three of these also, or when three come in we could move on to next phase:
 * 7) under revision (authors are responding to reviews)
 * 8) revision submitted (revised document reconsidered by either an associate editor equivalent or same three reviewers?)
 * 9) final decision (this is where I think we depart from traditional publishing; it would be accept, reject, or additional revision. In a wiki world the article is still there, now it meets, does not meet, or requires additional work to meet standards)

Any thoughts?

Declan Dmccabe 13:29, 27 September 2008 (UTC)