GeologyRocks

Overview of the process

The review process at GeologyRocks aims to reduce material that is not scientifically valid or is so poorly written as to be worthless onto the site. Your job as a reviewer is to uphold the quality of content on the site.

For an overview of the process in terms of the user, please see the review process help pages.

From the point of view of a reviewer, the process is as follows:

1. The editor will send you a URL with a request to review the content
2. Reply to the request either positive or negative
3. If negative, then your part in the process ceases for this material
4. If positive, fill in the form (you should have received Word versions at this point) as detailed on the form.
5. Send the form back to the editor when complete. They will remove your name from the form and send your review to the author.

Please give constructive criticism on all content, even if it is very poorly written. Do the minimum amount of work possible on your part; reviewing should not take hours. Be critical; if you think something needs to be better explained, say so. The editor will ultimately decide if this is the case, but it makes the editor’s job easier if your opinions are honest. Point out both deficiencies and positive aspects of the work; this avoids a purely negative review which can be demoralising for a first time author. As with all aspects of reviewing and moderating, fell free to contact the review if in doubt.

For tutorials and articles, two reviewers (one may be the editor) will look over the new content. For all other reviewed content, only one reviewer is used and the editor will look over reviews as required.

General things to look for correct grammar and spelling, appropriate use of figures, use of references (not so important on introductory tutorials) and a clear layout.

Reviewing Images

Images are very simple to review, but there are a few things to check:

• Is the image clear?
• Is the description adequate?
• Are all the fields completed? In particular image categories are often missed.

Reviewing Glossary Terms

As with images, glossary entries are easy to review. However, look out for:

• Poor language. Due to their brevity, glossary entries are often written in a hurry
• Have they used an existing glossary term? If so, it should be linked to.
• Can an image be used (especially an existing GeologyRocks one)?

Reviewing Tutorials and Articles

Tutorials and articles are the hardest types of content to review. A few simple things to check:

• Are there suitable introduction and conclusions?
• Use of headings throughout.
• Appropriate use of diagrams

The main concern for any tutorial is the scientific accuracy and clarity. If either of these can be improved, then do make suggestions

The form

The form is designed to be self-explanatory. Simply fill in the sections as appropriate and email the form back. Note that you will require Microsoft Word (or equivalent application) to use the form. The editor will send you the form via email when you have agreed to review material. Most of the information will already be filled in.