This chapter covers
- Comparing the code review and article review processes
- Determining who should review your work and when to start the process
- Preparing your reviewers
- Responding to comments
Let’s be honest: when you ask your peers to review something, your code or your writing, the only response you really want is “Wow, this is absolutely perfect—ship it!” Critical feedback inevitably stings, at least at first. But if you’re not sold on its value, think back to just a few of the many times a peer code review comment saved you from a much worse fate than that initial humbling. It’s no different with writing. Just do it. Your bruised ego will recover, your blog post will be better, and you’ll likely learn a few things in the process.
This chapter provides tips on how to make the article review process more valuable for you, as well as more straightforward for your reviewers. We’ll explore how article review compares to code review and then get into the logistics of applying the “four eyes” principle to your blog posts. Who should be reviewing your blog post, when, and how? How can you set the stage for more valuable feedback? And how do you handle tricky situations such as when you disagree with a reviewer’s suggestions?