Quality review

The open nature of wikis makes quality management a serious challenge. This page gives a general overview of quality review systems and their characteristics.

Review processes by types
A review process can be:
 * internal: the process is mainly handled locally by the wiki's community, and the data is stored in the wiki's pages or its database;
 * external: the process is mainly handled by an external group, and the data is stored outside the wiki. Integration with the wiki is optional.
 * mixed: e.g., an external group posts reviews on the wiki.

Some authority-based review processes distinguish between "experts" and others. In this case, reviewers can be classified whether they are:
 * "non-experts"
 * people self-identifying as experts (no credentials verification)
 * people identifying as experts whose credentials have been verified.

Review systems

 * exclusive: only one master review/rating possible
 * cumulative: multiple reviews/ratings possible

User research
In the context of quality review, there are two kinds of users: reviewers and review readers.

From a reviewer point of view
 * What system, how it works, what the goals are, what they expect
 * Do they want to communicate with review readers?

From a review reader point of view
 * What are their goals by reading a review? (i.e. what is useful for them)
 * What do they expect from a review?
 * Do they want to communicate with reviewers?

People who have already created review processes might be able to explain:
 * what were their goals when they created these tools & processes
 * whether some design decisions were intentional (e.g. type/scale of rating)

Domain research
Sources:
 * Article feedback/UX Research
 * Quality assessment tools for Wikipedia readers
 * Interviews
 * m:Expert review & m:Talk:Expert review
 * Survey: Expert barriers to Wikipedia (last question: people can volunteer to be interviewed)