The Sims Wiki:Fanon Peer Review Team

From The Sims Wiki, a collaborative database for The Sims series
(Redirected from The Sims Wiki:FPRT)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Fanon Peer Review Team (FPRT)
About the FPRT (talk) · Review requests · Re-review requests · Assistance requests

The Fanon Peer Review Team has been established to assist fanon writers on The Sims Wiki with creating and improving their works. The Fanon Peer Review Team is a group of fanon writers and other experienced users committed to helping, new and old writers alike, create excellent works of fanon.

Roles[edit source]

The goals of the Fanon Peer Review Team are to:

  • Evaluate fanon. The Team performs evaluations upon request, and will provide a rating and written explanation for the rating. Authors can follow the advice of the Team to improve their writing and the rating they receive.
  • Assist in fanon creation. Team members are willing and able to assist users in starting or developing their fanon, improving their writing, or with using templates and categories.
  • Promote fanon. The Team is active in working on The Sim's Pen and on other ways to advertise and promote unique and excellent works of fanon.

Members[edit source]

There are no strict requirements for membership on the FPRT at this time. Members are expected to be active in team discussions, fanon ratings, fanon promotions and team endeavors. If you feel you would like to be an active and engaged member of the team, please add your name to the list.

Ratings[edit source]

The Fanon Peer Review Team issues ratings as part of a peer review evaluation. Fanon authors can request a rating by adding the {{Peer review}} template to their fanon pages. Ratings are broken up into six generic tiers. The reviewer should, when addressing a request for a review, include the specific factors behind the rating chosen. The rating tiers are:

  • Outstanding - The article has no grammatical or style issues. The content on the article is well-detailed, thorough and complete. The article is thoroughly engaging and enjoyable to read.
  • Excellent - The article has very few, if any, grammatical or style issues. Most concepts are well-detailed. The article is interesting and engaging.
  • Good - The article may have some grammatical or style issues, or issues with layout and appearance, though no severe problems. Most concepts are covered in some detail, but some concepts could use further development.
  • Improvement suggested - The article has several grammatical, style, layout and appearance issues that detract from its quality. Concepts are not well developed. The work itself is not engaging to readers. The article may be nominated for a cleanup at this stage.
  • Improvement needed - The article has significant grammatical, style, layout and appearance problems, making it difficult or impossible to read. Content is thoroughly undeveloped and in need of expansion. If not improved, the article might be nominated for deletion.
  • Stub - The article is too short and lacks significant content. Though the content that is present may be of good quality, there is simply not enough to carry a full page. Content expansion is highly suggested.

Discussion pages[edit source]

The FPRT has different pages to discuss and coordinate its activities.

Related pages[edit source]