See also open review.
Peer reviewers for particular subject areas are responsible for public discussion of how to improve articles that have been submitted and also of article approval. Unlike other, rank-and-file Nupedia members, peer reviewers can vote to accept or reject an article. They can also be called upon to be the lead reviewer for a new article. This involves doing an initial, blind review/editing of the article before it is posted for open, public review. Peer reviewers should be true experts in their fields; the vast majority have Ph.D.'s or are a few months from getting their Ph.D.'s, or have equivalent publishing, teaching, and/or professional experience. All responsibilities are to be executed at the reviewer's discretion. One can participate as much or as little as one wishes (of course, the more the better).
We wish to encourage all accomplished scholars to join us peer reviewers in their areas of competence. You can ">apply very easily online, where you can even upload a CV for viewing by the the relevant subject editor (or by the editor-in-chief, if your area still lacks an editor). For more information or general inquiries, please write the relevant subject editor or the editor-in-chief, Larry Sanger, at lsanger@nupedia.com. To apply, we require a CV or resume, as well some means of establishing bona fides (a web page will probably suffice).
Like work done building open source software projects and dmoz.org, these are volunteer positions, but, we think, both rewarding and interesting. Nupedia's editorial structure is such that your participation will be a solid addition to your credentials.