Help:Articles with review

All articles in Encyclopedia Magnetica are created in three main steps.

Graphics: photos, drawings, diagrams
Authors of Encyclopedia Magnetica use every opportunity to take photos of various magnetic and electromagnetic devices. All graphics created by the authors themselves are then released under free licence (CC-BY-3.0 or similar) so that the readers can freely use it (see also: About Encyclopedia Magnetica). As soon as these materials become available they are uploaded to Magnetica so they can be accessed. However, writing the associated text is sometimes much longer process so for some time there might be "articles" which contain just photos of the objects in question.

This is only because we believe that having such photos available, even with just a single-line definition and without full description, is still more valuable to the users than not having any materials at all. All "just photo" pages are grouped in a category and will be developed in the full articles as soon as it is possible for the authors. Similar applies to other unfinished articles, which are still being edited, for any reason.

Writing
Commonly an article is written by one author. Larger/longer articles can be written by several people. In any case, the name of the author(s) is always given at the top of the page.

Encyclopedia Magnetica presents only information, which was already published and can be found in other sources. The details of these sources are always given at the bottom of each page, in the section titled References.

The first step towards quality of the information is taken at the writing stage. Any statement is based on some source information, which is always given, even if the authors are experts in the topic to be described.

Many types of references are used:
 * published books
 * articles published in scientific and technical journals
 * trustworthy websites (news archives and portals, manufacturer's website, universities, etc.)
 * data sheets of materials, components and devices
 * photographs of actual devices
 * opinions of specialist obtained by the author(s) through direct contact with the specialist person (this information is also stated in the References, with the name of the specialist given openly)

''In particular, a forum website is not deemed to be satisfactorily "trustworthy" source. ''

If a reliable source of information is not available, then such statement will be deleted from the article. In the viewpoint of the Authors it is better to have the information incomplete, rather than plainly incorrect. But of course, every effort is made to present the information as complete as possible.

Reviewing
Reviewing is carried out differently to the peer-review process used in scientific publications.

The main reason is that Encyclopedia Magnetica is a secondary source of information. Everything is based on other primary sources, which were scrutinised in some other way (editorial review for books, peer-review for scientific articles, experimental verification on datasheets, etc.)

Hence, the main aim of a review in Encyclopedia Magnetica is to verify that indeed all the statements are supported by the appropriate references. Such a review is carried out by a person who was not directly involved in authoring the given article. This also helps in reducing any grammar and spelling mistakes made by the original authors.

The reviewers of some articles might be authors of others, and vice versa. In any case, the name of the author(s) and reviewer(s) of each article are given at the top of each page.

All the articles are published immediately, even if they were not reviewed. Again, this is clearly stated at the top of the page, in the following form: this article awaits review

More information about this is given on this page: Articles without review.

After the review, the given article can be subjected to further edition and expansion. If the edits are minor, so that at no point substantial changes to the meaning or were made then no new review will be initiated. Minor changes can include: added or changed image, rewording of a sentence, grammar and spelling corrections, updating references (especially links to websites), deletion of any part of text or images, etc.

On the other hand, if the changes were substantial (e.g. addition of a new paragraph or section) then the article's status will be reverted to "awaiting review".

At the top of each article, apart from names of author(s) and reviewer(s) also dates of last edit and review are given. The number of days between edition and review has absolutely no correlation to the amount of changes in the article. For instance, a well-written and reviewed article might be re-edited months later, because a new photo on the subject became available. Thus the "last edit date" being many months after the "review date" is completely irrelevant.

If the article is marked as reviewed then the information can be trusted - it was double-checked by a second person, who verified all the statements and references, e.g.

reviewed by J. Leicht on 22 Jan 2013

There is a category with all the reviewed articles.