PubSci:ReviewerGuide

This guide covers writing reviews and inline annotations on PubSci. Read PubSci:About for background on how PubSci's identity model works before you start.

You need a Pharmacopedia account that is at least 30 days old. On your first PubSci visit, you register a pen name -- the same handle you use for authorship. One pen name covers both roles.

You cannot review your own papers. If your pen name appears in a paper's author list, the review form is not available to you for that paper.

Your pen name is permanently attached to every review and annotation you write. There are no anonymous reviews on PubSci. Your full review history is publicly visible on your [[Author:|profile page]].

This is by design. On PubSci, accountability flows from review. A reviewer's track record -- what they have said, about what papers, and how the community has rated their reviews -- is the primary identity signal. You can keep your human identity private indefinitely. Your reviewing record cannot be hidden.

1. Navigate to any published paper.
2. Click Write a review in the paper header.
3. You are taken to [[Special:Review/{PSI ID}]].
4. Write your review in the editor (wikitext; minimum 200 characters).
5. Preview if you want, then submit.

Your review publishes immediately and appears in the paper's review section.

One review per reviewer per paper version. If the author publishes a new version, you get a fresh review slot for that version. To revise your review on the same version, edit the existing one -- edits are logged and the revision history is publicly visible.

PubSci has no review rubric. Write what you think a reader or the author needs to know. Some things that tend to be useful:

• What the paper claims to do and whether it does it
• Methodological concerns, if any
• Missing context, prior work, or citations
• What is genuinely novel or interesting, if anything
• For null results: whether the null is credible and what it rules out

Minimum length is 200 characters -- enough to say something real. There is no maximum.

A review is not a vote. The community vote on a paper is a separate signal. Your review is a substantive written assessment. Short reviews that say only "good" or "bad" are technically permitted but will likely be rated poorly by the community.

A review coordinated to target an author rather than critique the work is bad-faith conduct. Admins investigate patterns of coordinated harassment and may flag or delete reviews that cross that line.

Annotations let you comment on a specific passage without writing a full review. You can annotate a paper you have not reviewed, and you can annotate papers you have reviewed.

1. On any published paper, select a text span with your cursor.
2. A tooltip appears with Annotate.
3. Write your annotation (minimum 20 characters) and submit.

Your annotation appears as a highlight in the paper body. Any reader can click the highlight to expand your comment. Your pen name is shown.

Annotations are permanent. They cannot be deleted except by an admin for legal-floor violations.

Every review has two separate vote controls.

Any signed-in user (including paper authors) can upvote or downvote a review. One vote per user per review; you can change your vote at any time. The net score (upvotes minus downvotes) is displayed publicly. Individual votes are never attributed.

You cannot vote on your own reviews.

If you are an author of the paper being reviewed, you get a separate, visually distinct vote labeled Author response. Your author vote is displayed publicly below the review with your pen name and an "Author" badge. It is not counted in the community score -- it is a separate, attributed signal.

You can also write an author reply -- a written response to the review that is pinned above the general comment thread. One reply per author per review; edits are logged.

Any signed-in user can post one comment per review. Comments are public, attributed to your pen name, and permanent.

Your reviewer reputation is a net score (community upvotes minus downvotes on your reviews). It is displayed on your profile and used to determine your reviewer tier.

Tier	Label	Review threshold
0	NEW	Fewer than 5 reviews
1	CONTRIBUTOR	5-24 reviews
2	REVIEWER	25-99 reviews
3	SENIOR	100-499 reviews
4	DISTINGUISHED	500 or more reviews

Thresholds are based on review count. Your reputation score is displayed alongside your tier badge. Neither gates any capability -- they are informational signals about your track record.

The NEW badge appears on your profile for your first 5 reviews or 3 months, whichever comes first.

Special:ReviewerBoard lists all reviewers ranked by score and tier. Filterable by field. It is public -- anyone can see it without signing in.

content@pubsci.io