Wikipedia:Good article review circles

Welcome! Good article review circles (GARC) are for people who want their Good Article Nomination (GAN) reviewed and are willing to review someone else's GAN. GARC is not quid pro quo or horse trading arrangement, because those approaches can lead to low-quality reviews, quick approvals, and a culture of complacency. The GARC model uses groups of four users who list their GANs and form a circle. In this setup, no one reviews the GAN of someone reviewing their own work, reducing pressure to pass the work and ensuring more thorough reviews.

Help promote this project by adding a userbox or inviting someone who may be interested.

How to participate

In order to participate in GARC, you must have either

reviewed 5 good article nominations, or
made 3,000 edits to the English Wikipedia.

Users who don't meet these requirements but are in an active good article mentorship may also participate in GARC.

Step 1: Add your article to the pool

Edit the nomination pool section below, and add the GARC-list-item template:

* {{GARC-list-item|topic you would like to review=  |GAN-subpage=  |article=  |nominator= {{subst:REVISIONUSER}} }}

Parameters

topic you would like to review: A topic or area of interest you would prefer to review. Eg. US politics, Geography, Sport, no preference, etc.
article: The name of the article you want reviewed.
GAN-subpage: 1 or 2 or 3 etc. If unsure, view the Talk page of the article, find the GA box near the top, and hover the cursor over the start review or discuss review text. Example: Talk:Barack Obama/GA1
nominator: Leave as {{subst:REVISIONUSER}}. But if the person inserting the template is not the nominator, change to show the nominator's name.

Step 2: Wait for notification

Wait for a GARC coordinator to post a notification on your Talk page. The notification will indicate which article you should review, but don't start the review yet.

Current coordinators: GMH Melbourne (talk), 750h+ (talk)

Step 3: Confirmation period

After receiving the notification, you have 24 hours to accept or decline the invitation. Edit the review circle table (link is in the notification) and enter "y" (accept) or "n" (decline). If you choose to decline the invitation (for instance, because you feel you are not qualified to review the article) your article will re-enter the pool. You may begin reviewing after all users in the circle have accepted the invitation, or 24 hours has elapsed, whichever comes first.

If a user declines a review, or if another user (outside the circle) starts reviewing an article from the circle, the coordinator will resolve the situation.

Step 4: Review the article

Performing the review should be prioritized higher than work on your own GAN article. You should complete the review within seven days (provided the nominator is responding promptly to your suggestions). You should respond promptly to any comments made by the user reviewing your article. You are encouraged to contribute to other GA reviews taking place within your review circle.

This user has their GA nominations reviewed quicker with good article review circles.

Get Userbox

Nomination pool

Bhutan at the 1992 Summer Olympics (talk | hist) 🟢 –– Review preference: History, Eastern European 2000 to 2025, and Politics –– User:History6042 (talk • stats)
Thyene imperialis (talk | hist) 🟢 –– Review preference: Art, architecture, geography or anything with offline sources –– User:Simongraham (talk • stats)
Taraxacum mongolicum (talk | hist) 🟢 –– Review preference: anything really, even med –– User:MallardTV (talk • stats)
Versions (Poison the Well album) (talk | hist) 🟢 –– Review preference: anything with 1,800 words or less –– User:Chchcheckit (talk • stats)