I think the article Karl Menninger is still a long ways from a Good Article nomination, yet I would still like some feedback / guidance regarding what is a priority if I want to take it in that direction. I think it still has one tag of citation needed, which maybe is a clearer reason why not to nominate for peer review.
I haven't seen elsewhere in wikipedia where to get feedback / ask for help. I asked 3 editors of wikiproject: biography - maybe that was ok? I think in one piece of the guidance/policy pages it actually talked about how maybe asking for a peer review without it being for GA or FA meant it would get taken care of faster, because less would be at stake. User:Dwarf Kirlston - talk00:50, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: an editor I had contacted was kind enough to give it a read and give some feedback! I hadn't seen! But it seems asking for wikiproject members to give feedback works for situations like mine? Instead of peer review which seems to be more for when it gets closer to GA or FA nominations?User:Dwarf Kirlston - talk01:08, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Dwarf Kirlston, after a quick look through the article I don't see anything major that should prevent you from opening a peer review if you're interested in improving it. Peer reviews can be opened even for articles that need a fair bit of work before a push for good or featured article status; there are no minimum requirements for an article's quality aside from the absence of major cleanup banners, as mentioned in the instructions. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 20:53, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I just want to echo the above - peer review is for articles at all stages of development, there are no restrictions on articles being too small or undeveloped, and I think it just as helpful for new editors as for old. Hope you find yours useful (n.b. you can often wait a while to hear back about your review...!). Tom (LT) (talk) 04:48, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A peer review is requested for the article 'Indira IVF,' which is currently undergoing an Articles for Deletion (AfD) discussion. The primary focus of this review should be the article's demonstration of notability as per Wikipedia's organizational notability guidelines, specifically WP:NORG, WP:ORGCRIT, and WP:CORPDEPTH. MH-wiki2025 (talk) 11:59, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hey MH-wiki2025, the peer review process is not well-suited to addressing notability issues, nor would it be appropriate to open a review while the article is actively being considered for deletion. If you'd like to encourage more participation at the AfD, consider leaving neutral notifications for relevant WikiProjects. Let me know if you have any questions about this. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 13:49, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
