Wikipedia:Reviewing good articles

Good articles meet a set of minimum standards (the Good article criteria) for quality of writing, factual accuracy and attribution, broadness of coverage, stability, and appropriate use of images. This guideline provides advice on how to review fairly against these criteria and hence decide whether to list a nomination as a Good article.

The Good article (GA) process is intentionally lightweight. Anyone can nominate an article and (subject to the next two paragraphs) any registered user can review: multiple votes, consensus building, and committees are not required.

The process is dependent on reviewer integrity. Reviewers may not review articles that they have edited significantly, and they should focus on determining whether the article meets the Good article criteria. The review should not be influenced by beliefs about how the article could be made "perfect", by how the reviewer would have written the article, or by personal feelings about the article topic. Reviewers should aim to advise on content and form rather than to impose their preferences. A reviewer involved in a contentious discussion should consider withdrawing, so that a less-involved editor can make the final assessment and decision on the Good article criteria.

A reviewer should be able to read the article critically and apply the Good article criteria fairly. If the reviewer believes that the criteria are met, then the reviewer should list it as a Good article. If any of the criteria are not met, the reviewer has two options:

Nominations are occasionally made by editors who happen upon an article that they believe is good quality, but the majority are made by editors who have spent extensive time working on the nominated article and are interested in improving it.

The process and mechanics of reviewing a nomination are described by the guidelines at the top of the Good article nominations page. The guidelines below focus instead on the evaluation and decision-making involved in reviewing a nomination.

Before conducting an extensive review, and after ensuring you are viewing an unvandalized version, check that the article does not have cleanup banners that are obviously still valid, including {{}}, {{}}, {{}} or large numbers of {{}}, {{}}, or similar inline tags. If it does you are entitled to fail the article without reviewing further. You can also give the nominator a chance to address the tagged issues if you wish. You should also check to see if the article has been nominated previously and if there are any outstanding issues from the last review.

...
Wikipedia