This section contains general information on the procedure and policies of the open review process. For an overview of the open review process, see Overview: Open review. Following the present section are a section about open review moderation policies and a section explaining the functions of primary and secondary areas for an article.
In the open review process, rank-and-file peer reviewers are most important in leading a discussion of the article; the category editor and the LR are important as well. In the discussion, politeness, helpfulness, and good nature is to be encouraged and is expected. Discussion might include: posting some brief general criticisms and questions; posing specific question; making corrections of facts, or asking someone to check the facts in an article against a particular source; responding to questions; etc. Peer reviewers are asked to consult the guidelines for writing and formatting articles to determine the acceptability of the article. The author(s) should provide revisions, and, when available, the revised version is then the subject of discussion.
When an editor gets the sense that the article has been hammered into proper shape (or if it arrived in perfect condition), approval of two peer reviewers is solicited (in case the LR is the editor), or of one peer reviewer and the editor. At that time, however, other peer reviewers might wish to make it clear that that particular article version is not acceptable (for specific, enumerated reasons).
When approval of the editor, the lead reviewer, and at least one peer reviewer is achieved, the article moves on to the copyedit stage. When the editor and the LR are the same person, the approval of two peer reviewers is needed; when the LR is neither the editor nor a peer reviewer, however, only one peer reviewer's approval is needed. In any case, there is a minimum of three votes required: the editor's, the LR's, and (depending on the identity of these people) at least one peer reviewer's. The Nupedia system tallies votes automatically. When the relevant people have indicated their approval to the system, the article automatically moves on to the copyedit stage.
Failing an acceptable rewrite within an editor-established time limit, the article can be rejected at the category editor's discretion. The topic can then be reassigned to a different writer. This is something that must be decided and acted upon by the editor.
See also our information about open review moderation as well as about the functions of primary and secondary areas.