Peer Review
spacering-net/codeg
Structured manuscript/grant review with checklist-based evaluation.
A skill your agent uses when anticipating how a New Media & Society (NM&S) manuscript will be judged — anonymous (double-anonymized) peer review, what interdisciplinary referees weigh, and the…
Install Newms Review Process
$ npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill newms-review-process -a claude-codeProject install by default; add -g for ~/.claude/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills newms-review-process --agent claude-codeProject scope by default; add --scope user for a personal install. Needs GitHub CLI 2.90.0 or later (public preview).
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills.git skills-src && mkdir -p .claude/skills && cp -r skills-src/New-Media-and-Society-Skills/skills/newms-review-process .claude/skills/newms-review-process && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.claude/skills/ instead of .claude/skills for a personal install. The folder must contain SKILL.md.
Claude Code skills documentation · loads skills from .claude/skills/
Install the "newms-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/New-Media-and-Society-Skills/skills/newms-review-process into .claude/skills/newms-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "newms-review-process", then confirm the skill loads.Claude Code copies the folder itself, the same result as the manual copy. Check what it changed before you commit it.
$skill-installer install https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/New-Media-and-Society-Skills/skills/newms-review-processType this inside Codex. $skill-installer <name> installs a curated skill from openai/skills. The installer writes to $CODEX_HOME/skills (default ~/.codex/skills). Restart Codex if the skill does not show up.
$ npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill newms-review-process -a codexProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.codex/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills newms-review-process --agent codexProject scope by default (.agents/skills/); add --scope user for a personal install.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills.git skills-src && mkdir -p .agents/skills && cp -r skills-src/New-Media-and-Society-Skills/skills/newms-review-process .agents/skills/newms-review-process && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.agents/skills/ instead of .agents/skills for a personal install.
Codex skills documentation · loads skills from .agents/skills/
Install the "newms-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/New-Media-and-Society-Skills/skills/newms-review-process into .agents/skills/newms-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "newms-review-process", then confirm the skill loads.Codex copies the folder itself, the same result as the manual copy. Check what it changed before you commit it.
$ npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill newms-review-process -a cursorProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.cursor/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills newms-review-process --agent cursorProject scope by default (.agents/skills/); add --scope user for a personal install.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills.git skills-src && mkdir -p .cursor/skills && cp -r skills-src/New-Media-and-Society-Skills/skills/newms-review-process .cursor/skills/newms-review-process && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.cursor/skills/ instead of .cursor/skills for a personal install.
Cursor skills documentation · loads skills from .cursor/skills/, .agents/skills/, .claude/skills/, .codex/skills/
Install the "newms-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/New-Media-and-Society-Skills/skills/newms-review-process into .cursor/skills/newms-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "newms-review-process", then confirm the skill loads.Cursor copies the folder itself, the same result as the manual copy. Check what it changed before you commit it.
$ gemini skills install https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills.git --path New-Media-and-Society-Skills/skills/newms-review-process--scope user (default) or --scope workspace; --path is the subfolder of the repo that holds the skill; --consent skips the security confirmation prompt.
$ npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill newms-review-process -a gemini-cliProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.gemini/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills newms-review-process --agent gemini-cliProject scope by default (.agents/skills/); add --scope user for a personal install.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills.git skills-src && mkdir -p .gemini/skills && cp -r skills-src/New-Media-and-Society-Skills/skills/newms-review-process .gemini/skills/newms-review-process && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.gemini/skills/ instead of .gemini/skills for a personal install, then run /skills reload.
Gemini CLI skills documentation · loads skills from .gemini/skills/, .agents/skills/
Install the "newms-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/New-Media-and-Society-Skills/skills/newms-review-process into .gemini/skills/newms-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "newms-review-process", then confirm the skill loads.Gemini CLI copies the folder itself, the same result as the manual copy. Check what it changed before you commit it.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills newms-review-processInstalls for Copilot at project scope by default; add --scope user for a personal install. Preview a skill first with gh skill preview. Needs GitHub CLI 2.90.0 or later (public preview).
$ npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill newms-review-process -a github-copilotProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.copilot/skills/.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills.git skills-src && mkdir -p .github/skills && cp -r skills-src/New-Media-and-Society-Skills/skills/newms-review-process .github/skills/newms-review-process && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.copilot/skills/ instead of .github/skills for a personal install. Commit .github/skills so cloud agent and code review can use it.
GitHub Copilot skills documentation · loads skills from .github/skills/, .claude/skills/, .agents/skills/
Install the "newms-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/New-Media-and-Society-Skills/skills/newms-review-process into .github/skills/newms-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "newms-review-process", then confirm the skill loads.GitHub Copilot copies the folder itself, the same result as the manual copy. Check what it changed before you commit it.
$ npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill newms-review-process -a opencodeOpenCode documents no install command of its own. Project install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.config/opencode/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills newms-review-process --agent opencodeProject scope by default (.agents/skills/); add --scope user for a personal install.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills.git skills-src && mkdir -p .opencode/skills && cp -r skills-src/New-Media-and-Society-Skills/skills/newms-review-process .opencode/skills/newms-review-process && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.config/opencode/skills/ instead of .opencode/skills for a personal install.
OpenCode skills documentation · loads skills from .opencode/skills/, .claude/skills/, .agents/skills/
Install the "newms-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/New-Media-and-Society-Skills/skills/newms-review-process into .opencode/skills/newms-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "newms-review-process", then confirm the skill loads.OpenCode copies the folder itself, the same result as the manual copy. Check what it changed before you commit it.
Facts
- Skill name
newms-review-process- GitHub stars
- 1.2k
- Token cost
- ~1.4k tokens
- SKILL.md length
- 529 words
- Files
- 1
- Skills in repo
- 2,387
- Repo updated
- First seen
- Licence
- MIT
At a glance
A skill your agent uses when anticipating how a New Media & Society (NM&S) manuscript will be judged — anonymous (double-anonymized) peer review, what interdisciplinary referees weigh, and the…
- Anticipating how a New Media & Society (NM&S) manuscript will be judged — anonymous (double-anonymized) peer review
- SKILL.md covers When to trigger, How NM&S review works, What interdisciplinary… and Decision categories (typical…, plus 6 more sections
- Instructions only: no scripts, shell commands, URLs or credentials in SKILL.md
- What interdisciplinary referees weigh
What it does
Newms Review Process is an agent skill from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills. Use when anticipating how a New Media & Society (NM&S) manuscript will be judged — anonymous (double-anonymized) peer review, what interdisciplinary referees weigh, and the decision categories. Sets expectations; it does not write the paper or the response letter.
Its SKILL.md is about 1.4k tokens, which your agent loads only when the skill is triggered. It is a single SKILL.md file with no bundled scripts.
It sits in Research & Science, covering Peer review. The repository describes itself as: Journal-specific Claude Code/Codex skill packs covering mainstream journals — AER, QJE, Nature, Cell, 管理世界, 经济研究 & 200+ more — your fast track to getting published. ｜ 覆盖主流期刊的… The licence is MIT.
When your agent uses it
- Anticipating how a New Media & Society (NM&S) manuscript will be judged — anonymous (double-anonymized) peer review
- What interdisciplinary referees weigh
- The decision categories
Example prompts
- “/newms-review-process”
What it can do on your machine
Read from SKILL.md and the folder at commit 932eb23. It shows what the files ask for, not the result of running them.
Tool permissions
Pre-approves nothing: there is no allowed-tools line, so your agent's usual permission prompts apply.
From allowed-tools in the SKILL.md frontmatter.
Runs code
No scripts in the folder and no shell commands in SKILL.md.
From the folder's file list and the shell code blocks in SKILL.md.
Network
No URLs in SKILL.md.
From URLs in SKILL.md, links to its own repository left out.
Credentials
Names no API keys, tokens, secrets or passwords.
From names ending in _API_KEY, _TOKEN, _SECRET, _KEY or _PASSWORD in SKILL.md.
Context cost
Newms Review Process loads about 1.4k tokens when it runs. Until then it costs about 71 tokens; SKILL.md has 529 words of instructions outside code blocks.
Estimates: characters ÷ 4, the usual rule of thumb; real counts depend on the model's tokenizer. Scripts and assets cost tokens only if the agent reads them.
Safety
Auto-check passed
The automated check found no risky patterns in SKILL.md.
Automated static check — not a guarantee. Review scripts before installing. It scans the text of SKILL.md for risky patterns (piping downloads into a shell, reading credential files, hidden Unicode, destructive commands); files beside SKILL.md are not scanned.
SKILL.md
The full file from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills at commit 932eb23, republished under its MIT licence (© brycewang-stanford). 529 words, ~1,376 tokens.
Download SKILL.mdSave it as
.claude/skills/newms-review-process/SKILL.md (or your agent's skills folder).- name
- newms-review-process
- description
- Use when anticipating how a New Media & Society (NM&S) manuscript will be judged — anonymous (double-anonymized) peer review, what interdisciplinary referees weigh, and the decision categories. Sets expectations; it does not write the paper or the response letter.
Review Process (newms-review-process)
NM&S runs a strictly anonymous peer review: the reviewer's name is withheld from the author and the author's name from the reviewer (a double-anonymized model). Understanding what an interdisciplinary panel weighs — and how high the bar is, given the journal's very large submission volume — helps you preempt the objections before they become a decision.
When to trigger
- Before submission, to stress-test the paper against likely referee objections
- After a decision, to read the letter and decide whether to revise (then go to
newms-rebuttal) - Estimating odds and effort given NM&S's selectivity
How NM&S review works
- Anonymous (double-anonymized). Reviewer and author identities are mutually withheld — so the manuscript must be masked (no identifying names, affiliations, or self-revealing phrasing); you may cite your own work, just not in a way that names you. Confirm the current masking rules at submission.
- High volume, high selectivity. NM&S receives a very large number of submissions (on the order of
hundreds per month, per the journal's editor call). Desk rejection for fit/scope is common; clearing
the fit gate (
newms-topic-selection) matters before craft. - Editorial transition. The journal is moving to new editor(s) in 2026; editor-specific preferences may shift — anchor on the durable standards below, and verify volatile specifics on the live page.
What interdisciplinary referees weigh
| Dimension | The question a referee asks | Where to fix it |
|---|---|---|
| Fit & significance | "Does this matter for new media and society broadly?" | newms-topic-selection |
| Positioning | "Did they engage the right (multiple) literatures?" | newms-literature-positioning |
| Conceptual payoff | "Is there a portable idea, or just a platform report?" | newms-theory-building |
| Method rigor | "Is the design sound for its kind?" | newms-research-design |
| Inference | "Are claims warranted; is analysis transparent?" | newms-data-analysis |
| Ethics | "Was online/platform data handled ethically?" | newms-transparency-and-data |
| Clarity | "Will a cross-field reader follow it in ~8,000 words?" | newms-writing-style |
Show full SKILL.md (238 more words)Show less
Decision categories (typical SAGE journal pattern; confirm wording)
- Reject (often desk, for fit/scope or fundamental flaws)
- Major revision — substantial concerns; the modal "good news" outcome
- Minor revision — close, address specific points
- Accept — rare on first pass
Treat a major revision as a genuine invitation: a careful, point-by-point response (newms-rebuttal)
materially improves the odds.
The pre-submission referee simulation
Before submitting, role-play three referees from different fields (e.g., a critical media scholar, a computational social scientist, an ethics-minded qualitative researcher). For each, write the single objection they would raise. If you cannot answer each in one paragraph plus one exhibit, that is a hole to fix now, not in the response letter.
Worked micro-example (illustrative)
Paper: digital ethnography of courier "datafied control."
Referee A (critical media): "Where's the political economy of the platform?" → add a paragraph on the
business model; cite platform-capitalism literature (positioning).
Referee B (computational): "N=30, how general?" → restate the claim as a mechanism with scope conditions,
not a population estimate (theory-building + research-design).
Referee C (ethics): "Did you consent the forum users?" → state IRB position + anonymization
(transparency-and-data). All three answerable in a paragraph + exhibit → ready.Calibration anchors
- Fit is the first gate. With desk rejection common, an out-of-scope paper never reaches craft review.
- Three fields, three objections. An interdisciplinary panel means the weakest cross-field link sinks you.
- Verify volatile specifics. Masking rules, decision labels, and editor preferences can change — especially across the 2026 editorial transition; confirm on the live page.
Anti-patterns
- Submitting an unmasked manuscript to an anonymous-review journal
- Optimizing for one field's referee and ignoring the other two
- Treating a major revision as a rejection instead of an invitation
- Assuming a niche platform study will clear a high-volume desk screen
- Relying on a specific editor's known taste during an editorial transition
Output format
【Stage】pre-submission stress-test / post-decision read
【Three referees】the cross-field objection from each, and whether answerable now
【Biggest risk】the dimension most likely to sink it, and the skill that fixes it
【Decision read】(if applicable) reject / major / minor / accept → next move
【Next】newms-submission (pre) or newms-rebuttal (post-decision)Supplementary resources
../../resources/exemplars/library.md— papers that cleared the bar, by method../../resources/official-source-map.md— review model, volume, editorial transition
© brycewang-stanford, MIT. Rendered from Markdown: HTML in the file is shown as text, images as links, and headings moved down two levels. Raw file
Files
Just SKILL.md in New-Media-and-Society-Skills/skills/newms-review-process of brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills.
Open the folder on GitHubat commit 932eb23
Compare with similar skills
Newms Review Process next to the 5 skills that share the most tags, products or categories with it. Stars are the repository's; “used in” counts other GitHub owners with a copy.
| Skill | Stars | Used in | Tokens | Auto-check | Licence | Repo updated |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Newms Review Process this skillbrycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills | 1.2k | — | ~1.4k | Automated safety check: Pass | MIT | |
| Peer Reviewspacering-net/codeg | 3.9k | 17 repos | ~5.9k | Automated safety check: Notes | MIT | |
| Scholar Evaluationspacering-net/codeg | 3.9k | 11 repos | ~3.2k | Automated safety check: Pass | MIT | |
| Academic Paper Writing PipelineImbad0202/academic-research-skills | 51k | — | ~16k | Automated safety check: Pass | Custom licence | |
| Academic Paper ReviewerImbad0202/academic-research-skills | 51k | — | ~11k | Automated safety check: Pass | Custom licence | |
| Peer ReviewK-Dense-AI/claude-scientific-writer | 2.4k | 2 repos | ~3.1k | Automated safety check: Notes | MIT |
Similar skills
Scholar Evaluation
spacering-net/codeg
Systematically evaluate scholarly work using the ScholarEval framework, providing structured assessment across research quality dimensions including problem formulation, methodology, analysis, and…
Academic Paper Writing Pipeline
Imbad0202/academic-research-skills
Runs a 12-agent pipeline that plans, drafts, cites, reviews and formats academic papers, with modes for revision, rebuttals, abstracts and citation checks.
Academic Paper Reviewer
Imbad0202/academic-research-skills
Simulates a journal peer review of a manuscript with a five-seat reviewer panel, an editorial synthesizer and several review modes.
Peer Review
K-Dense-AI/claude-scientific-writer
Prepare evidence-bounded, constructive peer-review drafts and structured manuscript assessments.
Academic Research Pipeline
Imbad0202/academic-research-skills
Orchestrates a ten-stage academic workflow from research to finished manuscript, including integrity checks, two rounds of peer review and revision.
More from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills
All 2,387 skills in this repoAaag Data Analysis
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills
A skill your agent uses when running and reporting the analysis for an Annals of the American Association of Geographers manuscript — spatial statistics and modeling, remote-sensing accuracy, or…
Aaag Literature Positioning
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills
A skill your agent uses when positioning an Annals of the American Association of Geographers manuscript in the literature — engaging geographic scholarship across the relevant area and the…
Aaag Rebuttal
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills
A skill your agent uses when responding to an Annals of the American Association of Geographers decision letter (major/minor revision) — building a point-by-point response to the subject editor and…
Aaag Research Design
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills
A skill your agent uses when defending the research design of an Annals of the American Association of Geographers manuscript — spatial/quantitative analysis and GIScience, remote-sensing and…
Aaag Review Process
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills
A skill your agent uses when you need to understand how the Annals of the American Association of Geographers evaluates a manuscript — double-anonymous review routed through a subject editor by…
Aaag Submission
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills
A skill your agent uses when running the final pre-submission preflight for the Annals of the American Association of Geographers via ScholarOne Manuscripts — area/article-type selection…
Related
Categories
Questions about Newms Review Process
What does Newms Review Process do?
A skill your agent uses when anticipating how a New Media & Society (NM&S) manuscript will be judged — anonymous (double-anonymized) peer review, what interdisciplinary referees weigh, and the…. Newms Review Process is an agent skill from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills. Use when anticipating how a New Media & Society (NM&S) manuscript will be judged — anonymous (double-anonymized) peer review, what interdisciplinary referees weigh, and the decision categories.
When should I use Newms Review Process?
Newms Review Process fits situations like: anticipating how a New Media & Society (NM&S) manuscript will be judged — anonymous (double-anonymized) peer review; what interdisciplinary referees weigh; the decision categories.
How do I install Newms Review Process in Claude Code?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill newms-review-process -a claude-code`. Or copy the skill folder (New-Media-and-Society-Skills/skills/newms-review-process in brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) into .claude/skills/newms-review-process in your project. Claude Code loads it when a task matches its description.
How do I install Newms Review Process in Codex?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill newms-review-process -a codex`. Or copy the skill folder (New-Media-and-Society-Skills/skills/newms-review-process in brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) into .agents/skills/newms-review-process in your project. Codex loads it when a task matches its description.
Can I use Newms Review Process in Cursor, Gemini CLI or GitHub Copilot?
Cursor, Gemini CLI, GitHub Copilot and OpenCode also load SKILL.md folders. With the skills CLI, run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill newms-review-process -a cursor` (or -a gemini-cli, github-copilot or opencode for the others). To copy it by hand, put the folder in .cursor/skills/newms-review-process, .gemini/skills/newms-review-process, .github/skills/newms-review-process and .opencode/skills/newms-review-process in your project.
What does Newms Review Process need to run?
SKILL.md names no scripts, command-line tools or credentials: Newms Review Process is instructions for the agent only.
Does Newms Review Process access the network?
SKILL.md contains no URLs. Any network use would come from the scripts or tools the agent runs. This is read from the text; nothing was executed.
Is Newms Review Process safe to install?
Our automated static check of SKILL.md found no risky patterns, such as piping downloads into a shell, reading credential files or hidden Unicode. It is not a guarantee. Review the folder before installing.
What licence does Newms Review Process use?
Newms Review Process is published under the MIT licence (the repository's licence). It allows redistribution, so the full SKILL.md is shown on this page.
How many tokens does Newms Review Process use?
About 1.4k tokens (SKILL.md is roughly 5.5k characters). Agents keep only the skill's name and description in context until a task matches; then they load SKILL.md in full.
What are the alternatives to Newms Review Process?
Skills that share tags, products or a category with Newms Review Process: Peer Review (spacering-net/codeg, 3.9k stars), Scholar Evaluation (spacering-net/codeg, 3.9k stars), Academic Paper Writing Pipeline (Imbad0202/academic-research-skills, 51k stars) and Academic Paper Reviewer (Imbad0202/academic-research-skills, 51k stars). The comparison table on this page puts their stars, adoption, token cost, safety result and licence side by side.
Who maintains Newms Review Process?
brycewang-stanford (a GitHub user) maintains it in brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills, which has 1,231 GitHub stars. The repository holds 2,387 skills in this directory. The repository was last updated on September 27, 2026.
Source: brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills on GitHub. Facts on this page come from the repository at the commit we read; the author's words are quoted as theirs.