| Status | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
...
You are expected to co-create pages.
You are expected to provide feedback on pages written by other members of the Writing group
To get a clear understanding of what is expected in each section of a FAIR Metroline page, study the template.
Adhere to the Style guide
Ensure the content you provide respects copyright by following the Copyright guidelines (TODO).
Suggested approach for writing a page
...
You are expected to review pages
The Editorial board will communicate with timeline when and which pages are available for review after the monthly board meeting. Pages will be available for review for two weeks.
Review process:
Content accuracy: Reviewers thoroughly evaluate the accuracy of the information. They check facts, figures, and references to ensure that all information is correct and up-to-date.
Clarity and readability: Reviewers assess whether the content is clearly written and easy to understand. They check for logical flow, clear explanations, and appropriate use of language.
Relevance and value: Reviewers ensure that the content is relevant to the intended audience and provides valuable insights or guidance. They assess whether the content meets the objectives defined in the outline.
Feedback and suggestions:
Constructive feedback: Reviewers provide detailed feedback, highlighting strengths and identifying areas for improvement. This includes suggestions for enhancing clarity, adding missing information, or correcting inaccuracies.
Specific comments: Reviewers may use tools such as comments or track changes to provide specific notes within the document. This helps the author understand exactly where changes are needed. Please make sure the suggestions are constructive and respectful.
Author revisions:
Incorporating feedback: The author or writing group reviews the feedback and makes necessary revisions to the draft. This may involve rewriting sections, adding new information, or adjusting formatting. Contributors may contact you to further clarify/discuss a suggestion. Note that even though all suggestions will be taken seriously, not all will necessarily be adopted.
Second review:
Review of revisions: Reviewers check that all feedback has been adequately addressed and that the revised content meets quality standards. They ensure that all issues identified in the initial review have been resolved.
Final suggestions: If minor adjustments are still needed, reviewers provide final suggestions to the author.
Approval for publication: If the content meets all criteria, the editorial board approves it for publication and updates the status. If further revisions are needed, the content is sent back to the author with specific instructions.
...