Peer Review
spacering-net/codeg
Structured manuscript/grant review with checklist-based evaluation.
A skill your agent uses when choosing suggested and excluded referees for a Nature Geoscience submission and pre-empting the objections Earth-science referees are likely to raise.
Install Ngeo Referee Strategy
$ npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill ngeo-referee-strategy -a claude-codeProject install by default; add -g for ~/.claude/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills ngeo-referee-strategy --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/Nature-Geoscience-Skills/skills/ngeo-referee-strategy .claude/skills/ngeo-referee-strategy && 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 "ngeo-referee-strategy" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/Nature-Geoscience-Skills/skills/ngeo-referee-strategy into .claude/skills/ngeo-referee-strategy/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "ngeo-referee-strategy", 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/Nature-Geoscience-Skills/skills/ngeo-referee-strategyType 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 ngeo-referee-strategy -a codexProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.codex/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills ngeo-referee-strategy --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/Nature-Geoscience-Skills/skills/ngeo-referee-strategy .agents/skills/ngeo-referee-strategy && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.agents/skills/ instead of .agents/skills for a personal install.
Codex skills documentation · loads skills from .agents/skills/
Install the "ngeo-referee-strategy" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/Nature-Geoscience-Skills/skills/ngeo-referee-strategy into .agents/skills/ngeo-referee-strategy/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "ngeo-referee-strategy", 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 ngeo-referee-strategy -a cursorProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.cursor/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills ngeo-referee-strategy --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/Nature-Geoscience-Skills/skills/ngeo-referee-strategy .cursor/skills/ngeo-referee-strategy && 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 "ngeo-referee-strategy" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/Nature-Geoscience-Skills/skills/ngeo-referee-strategy into .cursor/skills/ngeo-referee-strategy/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "ngeo-referee-strategy", 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 Nature-Geoscience-Skills/skills/ngeo-referee-strategy--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 ngeo-referee-strategy -a gemini-cliProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.gemini/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills ngeo-referee-strategy --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/Nature-Geoscience-Skills/skills/ngeo-referee-strategy .gemini/skills/ngeo-referee-strategy && 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 "ngeo-referee-strategy" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/Nature-Geoscience-Skills/skills/ngeo-referee-strategy into .gemini/skills/ngeo-referee-strategy/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "ngeo-referee-strategy", 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 ngeo-referee-strategyInstalls 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 ngeo-referee-strategy -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/Nature-Geoscience-Skills/skills/ngeo-referee-strategy .github/skills/ngeo-referee-strategy && 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 "ngeo-referee-strategy" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/Nature-Geoscience-Skills/skills/ngeo-referee-strategy into .github/skills/ngeo-referee-strategy/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "ngeo-referee-strategy", 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 ngeo-referee-strategy -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 ngeo-referee-strategy --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/Nature-Geoscience-Skills/skills/ngeo-referee-strategy .opencode/skills/ngeo-referee-strategy && 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 "ngeo-referee-strategy" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/Nature-Geoscience-Skills/skills/ngeo-referee-strategy into .opencode/skills/ngeo-referee-strategy/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "ngeo-referee-strategy", 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
ngeo-referee-strategy- GitHub stars
- 1.2k
- Token cost
- ~1.6k tokens
- SKILL.md length
- 698 words
- Files
- 1
- Skills in repo
- 2,387
- Repo updated
- First seen
- Licence
- MIT
At a glance
A skill your agent uses when choosing suggested and excluded referees for a Nature Geoscience submission and pre-empting the objections Earth-science referees are likely to raise.
- Works in 3 steps: Method judge — a paleoceanographer who… → Modelling witness — a climate modeller… → Breadth witness — a climate-dynamics…
- Tasks that involve Physical and earth sciences
- SKILL.md covers When to trigger, How Nature Geoscience review…, Choosing suggested referees and Choosing excluded referees, plus 5 more sections
- Instructions only: no scripts, shell commands, URLs or credentials in SKILL.md
What it does
Ngeo Referee Strategy is an agent skill from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills. Use when choosing suggested and excluded referees for a Nature Geoscience submission and pre-empting the objections Earth-science referees are likely to raise. Plans referee handling; does not write the manuscript or the rebuttal.
Its SKILL.md is about 1.6k 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 Physical and earth sciences and 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
- Tasks that involve Physical and earth sciences
- Tasks that involve Peer review
Example prompts
- “/ngeo-referee-strategy”
Workflow steps
3 steps, taken from the first numbered list in SKILL.md.
- Method judge — a paleoceanographer who runs the same proxy and can interrogate the calibration and age model.
- Modelling witness — a climate modeller who can assess the data–model comparison and the circulation inference.
- Breadth witness — a climate-dynamics scientist who answers "why Nature Geoscience and not a paleo community journal," i.e. why it bears on…
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
Ngeo Referee Strategy loads about 1.6k tokens when it runs. Until then it costs about 63 tokens; SKILL.md has 698 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). 698 words, ~1,576 tokens.
Download SKILL.mdSave it as
.claude/skills/ngeo-referee-strategy/SKILL.md (or your agent's skills folder).- name
- ngeo-referee-strategy
- description
- Use when choosing suggested and excluded referees for a Nature Geoscience submission and pre-empting the objections Earth-science referees are likely to raise. Plans referee handling; does not write the manuscript or the rebuttal.
Nature Geoscience Referee Strategy (ngeo-referee-strategy)
When to trigger
- The Editorial Manager form asks for suggested / excluded reviewers
- You want to anticipate the objections a Nature Geoscience referee will raise and address them in advance
- A prior manuscript was declined and you are rethinking who reviews it
- You are coordinating the cover-letter referee section (see
ngeo-cover-letter)
How Nature Geoscience review works (durable shape)
An in-house editor first triages on broad interest and Earth-system importance; only a minority of submissions are sent out. Those that pass go to referees (commonly two to three) who assess both technical soundness and significance/breadth. A referee can recommend rejection on interest grounds even when the work is correct — so your strategy must defend the science and the venue fit. Review is single-blind by default, with an opt-in double-blind route (choose it at submission and anonymise the manuscript accordingly). Resubmission and appeal routes exist (handled in ngeo-revision).
Choosing suggested referees
| Principle | Practice |
|---|---|
| Competent on the method | Can actually judge your instruments, proxy, or model |
| Spans the breadth claim | Include someone from the neighboring Earth-science field you claim to reach |
| Covers the evidence type | If it is field + model, cover both the observational and modelling sides |
| No conflict of interest | Not recent collaborators, advisors, or same-institution |
| Constructive, not partisan | Known for fair, rigorous reports — not reflexive gate-keeping |
| Grasps the significance | Will recognise why the result is broad, not just correct |
Suggest a small set that together can vouch for correctness, the evidence, and breadth. Do not stack suggestions only with subfield insiders — editors may read that as evading the broad-interest test. Consider global diversity of expertise; Earth-system questions often need both a regional expert and a global-perspective referee.
Choosing excluded referees
- Exclude only with a brief, professional, factual rationale (a direct competitor with a conflict, a documented dispute). Editors discount emotional or vague objections.
- Do not over-exclude; a long exclusion list signals defensiveness. Nature journals typically cap the number you may exclude.
Worked example: a referee slate
Suppose the Article reports a proxy-based ocean-circulation reconstruction whose headline consequence bears on climate sensitivity:
- Method judge — a paleoceanographer who runs the same proxy and can interrogate the calibration and age model.
- Modelling witness — a climate modeller who can assess the data–model comparison and the circulation inference.
- Breadth witness — a climate-dynamics scientist who answers "why Nature Geoscience and not a paleo community journal," i.e. why it bears on a first-order question.
The three-role logic transfers to any subfield: one referee for the measurement or model, one for the neighboring field you claim to reach, one independent senior figure. If you cannot name a credible breadth witness, that is diagnostic — revisit ngeo-scope-fit.
Show full SKILL.md (255 more words)Show less
Pre-empting the likely objections (do this in the manuscript, not just the letter)
Anticipate the standard Nature Geoscience referee moves and disarm them in advance:
- "This is regional / not broad enough." → Strengthen the broad-interest framing in the opening and cover letter (
ngeo-results-framing,ngeo-cover-letter). - "The model is not grounded in observations." → Show the data–model validation in the main text (
ngeo-methods). - "Uncertainty is not quantified." → State propagated uncertainty on the headline number (
ngeo-methods). - "Incremental over Ref. [X]." → Make the qualitative Earth-system advance explicit; cite and differentiate.
- "Can't follow it without the Supplementary." → Ensure the main text stands alone (
ngeo-supplementary). - "Over-claimed attribution/impact." → Calibrate claims to evidence (
ngeo-writing-style).
Checklist
- Suggested referees can judge correctness, the evidence type, AND breadth
- At least one suggested referee represents the claimed neighboring field
- Observational and modelling sides both covered if the study is mixed
- No conflicts of interest among suggestions
- Excluded referees (if any) have a brief, factual, professional rationale
- The exclusion list is short (within any journal cap)
- The manuscript already pre-empts the top objections (breadth, grounding, uncertainty)
- Cover-letter referee section is consistent with the Editorial Manager form
- Double-blind opt-in decision made and manuscript anonymised if chosen
Anti-patterns
- Suggesting only close-network insiders (reads as breadth evasion)
- Excluding referees with emotional or unsubstantiated reasons
- A long exclusion list that signals defensiveness
- Suggesting a recent collaborator (conflict) as an "independent" referee
- Ignoring the breadth or grounding objection and hoping the science alone carries it
Output format
【Suggested referees】N — cover correctness + evidence + breadth? yes / adjust
【Neighboring-field referee included】yes / add
【Obs + model sides covered】yes / n/a / add
【Conflicts checked】clean / fix
【Excluded referees】N (short) — factual rationale? yes / fix
【Top objections pre-empted】breadth / grounding / uncertainty / increment / stand-alone / over-claim
【Next】ngeo-submission (enter referees) → later ngeo-revisionReferee counts, exclusion caps, and double-blind mechanics evolve — verify on the official Nature Geoscience author pages (Checked: 2026-07-16).
© 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 Nature-Geoscience-Skills/skills/ngeo-referee-strategy of brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills.
Open the folder on GitHubat commit 932eb23
Compare with similar skills
Ngeo Referee Strategy 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ngeo Referee Strategy this skillbrycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills | 1.2k | — | ~1.6k | 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 Ngeo Referee Strategy
What does Ngeo Referee Strategy do?
A skill your agent uses when choosing suggested and excluded referees for a Nature Geoscience submission and pre-empting the objections Earth-science referees are likely to raise. Ngeo Referee Strategy is an agent skill from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills. Use when choosing suggested and excluded referees for a Nature Geoscience submission and pre-empting the objections Earth-science referees are likely to raise.
When should I use Ngeo Referee Strategy?
Ngeo Referee Strategy fits situations like: tasks that involve Physical and earth sciences; tasks that involve Peer review.
How do I install Ngeo Referee Strategy in Claude Code?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill ngeo-referee-strategy -a claude-code`. Or copy the skill folder (Nature-Geoscience-Skills/skills/ngeo-referee-strategy in brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) into .claude/skills/ngeo-referee-strategy in your project. Claude Code loads it when a task matches its description.
How do I install Ngeo Referee Strategy in Codex?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill ngeo-referee-strategy -a codex`. Or copy the skill folder (Nature-Geoscience-Skills/skills/ngeo-referee-strategy in brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) into .agents/skills/ngeo-referee-strategy in your project. Codex loads it when a task matches its description.
Can I use Ngeo Referee Strategy 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 ngeo-referee-strategy -a cursor` (or -a gemini-cli, github-copilot or opencode for the others). To copy it by hand, put the folder in .cursor/skills/ngeo-referee-strategy, .gemini/skills/ngeo-referee-strategy, .github/skills/ngeo-referee-strategy and .opencode/skills/ngeo-referee-strategy in your project.
What does Ngeo Referee Strategy need to run?
SKILL.md names no scripts, command-line tools or credentials: Ngeo Referee Strategy is instructions for the agent only.
Does Ngeo Referee Strategy 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 Ngeo Referee Strategy 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 Ngeo Referee Strategy use?
Ngeo Referee Strategy 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 Ngeo Referee Strategy use?
About 1.6k tokens (SKILL.md is roughly 6.3k 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 Ngeo Referee Strategy?
Skills that share tags, products or a category with Ngeo Referee Strategy: 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 Ngeo Referee Strategy?
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.