Accuracy review/docs/answer

From mediawiki.org
Jump to navigation Jump to search

A reviewer may experience three kinds of scenarios while answering a question:

  1. First reviewer - A never-answered-before question will be posed to the reviewer. The reviewer now needs to look into the issue raised in the question and provide a well thought out solution for resolving it. The reviewer can optionally add any relevant URL that may be relevant to the solution proposed.
  2. Second reviewer - This reviewer will be provided with the question and the original answer proposed. They now need to decide whether to endorse or oppose the solution provided by the first reviewer.
  3. Tie-break reviewer - This scenario arises when the second reviewer opposes the solution provided by the first one. The tie-break reviewer will now be provided with the question, original answer and second reviewer's comments. They now need to decide whether to endorse the original answer or the opposing comment.

Technical implementation details[edit]

When a reviewer lands at this endpoint, a randomly chosen question is displayed to them, along with the answer and comments if any. They can be presented with just a question to answer, or be asked to provide comments, or even be the tie-breaker.

If the question hasn’t been answered before, the reviewer needs to answer it. The file name has the same 9-digit code as the question followed by an ‘a’. If the reviewer is presented with a question and corresponding answer, they can choose to endorse or oppose the answer which creates ‘e’ or ‘o’ files respectively. In case the answer is endorsed, it is now ready to be opened by a recommender to implement the necessary changes suggested in the answer file. In the case that the original answer has been opposed, the question along with the answer and comments passed by the opposer are presented to a third reviewer, who can finally decide to endorse or oppose the original answer.