WikiProject Europe has a joint peer review programme with WikiProject European Union. Members of both projects can propose and review each other's articles.

• European Court of Auditors - J Logan ^t: 15:00, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Opt-outs in the European Union —Nightstallion 16:20, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Geography of Bosnia and Herzegovina, I give it a GA quality rating and a top priority label - U5K0 ^t: 19:30, 29 September 2007 (ECT)
• Flag of Europe - J Logan ^t: 15:57, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• European integration a (B category) to do list on the talk page would be grately appreciated. --U5K0 (talk) 01:38, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Future Launchers Preparatory Programme (FLPP), Request for Complete review. Rik ISS-fan (talk) 22:37, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Ariane 6 requesting quality reassessment SkywalkerPL (talk) 10:13, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Les Espaces d'Abraxas - Expanded the content by an extra 2000 words. Lead still needs some work, also trying to find photos I can use, as photos of the building are not in the Creative Commons due to French law. Greenroof1234 (talk) 10:44, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The European Peer review process exposes articles to closer scrutiny from a broader group of editors, and is intended for high-quality articles that have already undergone extensive work, often as a way of preparing a featured article candidate. It is not academic peer review by a group of experts in a particular subject, and articles that undergo this process should not be assumed to have greater authority than any other. For feedback on articles that are less developed, use the article's talk page or requests for feedback.

For general editing advice, see Wikipedia style guidelines, Wikipedia how-to, "How to write a great article", and "The perfect article". Articles that need extensive basic editing should be directed to Pages needing attention, Requests for expansion or Cleanup, and content or neutrality disputes should be listed at Requests for comment.

Anyone can request peer review. The best way to get lots of reviews is to reply promptly and appreciatively on this page to any comments. If you post a request, please do not discourage reviewers by ignoring their efforts.

While not required it is strongly encouraged that users submitting new peer review requests choose an article from those already listed to peer review. Preference should be given to those articles which have been listed the longest with little or no response (not including automated peer reviews).

To add a nomination simply place {{E-peer}} at the top of the article's talk page, creating a peer review notice to notify other editors of the review. Then create a section on the talk page entitled "Peer Review" and note the kind of comments/contributions you want, and/or the sections of the article you think need reviewing. Sign with four tildes (~~~~). Finally, edit current requests at the top of this page, and at the top of that section write: * ARTICLE NAME ~~~~

• Review one of the articles below. If you think something is wrong—e.g., article length, the lead section, poor grammar/spelling, factual errors—post a comment in the article's section on this page. If you create a subsection within a review for your comments, please do not link your username: it is easily confused with an article title.
• Feel free to correct the article yourself. Please consider noting your edits here and on the talk page to keep others informed about the article's progress.

Feel free to remove the request when it has become a featured article candidate, been inactive for a month or if it is an inappropriate or abandoned listing (where the nominator has not replied to comments).

An article's quality assessment is generated from the class parameter in the {{WikiProject Banner Shell}}. Articles that have the {{WikiProject Europe}} project banner on their talk page will be added to the appropriate categories by quality.

The following values may be used for the class parameter to describe the quality of the article (see Wikipedia:Content assessment for assessment criteria):

FA (for featured articles only; adds articles to Category:FA-Class Europe articles)		FA
A (adds articles to Category:A-Class Europe articles)		A
GA (for good articles only; adds articles to Category:GA-Class Europe articles)		GA
B (adds articles to Category:B-Class Europe articles)		B
C (adds articles to Category:C-Class Europe articles)		C
Start (adds articles to Category:Start-Class Europe articles)		Start
Stub (adds articles to Category:Stub-Class Europe articles)		Stub
FL (for featured lists only; adds articles to Category:FL-Class Europe articles)		FL
List (adds articles to Category:List-Class Europe articles)		List

For non-standard grades and non-mainspace content, the following values may be used for the class parameter:

Category (for categories; adds pages to Category:Category-Class Europe pages)		Category
Disambig (for disambiguation pages; adds pages to Category:Disambig-Class Europe pages)		Disambig
Draft (for drafts; adds pages to Category:Draft-Class Europe pages)		Draft
FM (for featured media only; adds pages to Category:FM-Class Europe pages)		FM
File (for files and timed text; adds pages to Category:File-Class Europe pages)		File
Portal (for portal pages; adds pages to Category:Portal-Class Europe pages)		Portal
Project (for project pages; adds pages to Category:Project-Class Europe pages)		Project
Redirect (for redirect pages; adds pages to Category:Redirect-Class Europe pages)		Redirect
Template (for templates and modules; adds pages to Category:Template-Class Europe pages)		Template
NA (for any other pages where assessment is unnecessary; adds pages to Category:NA-Class Europe pages)		NA
??? (articles for which a valid class has not yet been provided are listed in Category:Unassessed Europe articles)		???

An article's importance assessment is generated from the importance parameter in the {{WikiProject Europe}} project banner on its talk page:

The following values may be used for the importance parameter to describe the relative importance of the article within the project (see Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Priority of topic for assessment criteria):

An article's assessment is generated from the class and importance parameters in the {{WikiProject Europe}} and {{WikiProject European Union}} project banners on its talk page. You can learn the syntax by looking at the talk pages in edit mode and by reading the info below. See the banners pages for details of their syntax's.

Note: A B-class article should have at least one reference.

article is easy to comprehande

The criteria used for rating article importance are not meant to be an absolute or canonical view of how significant the topic is. Rather, they attempt to gauge the probability of the average reader of Wikipedia needing to look up the topic (and thus the immediate need to have a suitably well-written article on it). Thus, subjects with greater popular notability may be rated higher than topics which are arguably more "important" but which are of interest primarily to students of hagiography. Importance does not equate to quality; a featured article could rate 'mid' on importance.

Note that general notability need not be from the perspective of editor demographics; generally notable topics should be rated similarly regardless of the country or region in which they hold said notability. Thus, topics which may seem obscure to a Western audience—but which are of high notability in other places—should still be highly rated. Rate international region/country-specific articles from the prespective of someone from that region.