artbull-review-process
Use to understand how The Art Bulletin evaluates a submission — double-blind peer review, what referees and the editor look for in art-historical work, and the likely decision outcomes. Helps anticipate review; it does not contact editors or simulate a specific referee.
Profile →npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill artbull-review-process --agent claude-code
Same command for any agent — swap --agent for codex, cursor, copilot.
Weekly change comes from our own snapshots, not the repository page — it measures attention, not adoption.
# Review Process (artbull-review-process) The Art Bulletin uses **double-blind peer review**: both author and reviewers are anonymous, which is why submissions must be **Microsoft Word (not PDF)** with all author-identifying information stripped from text and notes. Knowing what referees weigh helps you pre-empt the objections that sink papers. ## When to trigger - Before submitting, to pressure-test the paper against likely referee objections - Understanding why anonymity (Word, no self-revealing citations) matters procedurally - Interpreting a decision letter and planning next steps - Deciding whether the contribution is strong enough for the discipline's flagship ## How the journal evaluates 1. **Double-blind, expert review.** The editor sends anonymized manuscripts to specialist referees; anonymity protects the process, so any breach (names, "as I argued in…," telltale metadata) is a real risk (see `artbull-submission`). 2. **What referees weigh.** The originality and significance of the **art-historical argument**; the quality of **close visual analysis**; the soundness of documentary, archival, and provenance evidence; command of the **historiography**; and whether the figure
- When to trigger
- How the journal evaluates
- Pre-empt the common objections
- Anti-patterns
- Desk-screen and referee-axis matrix for the discipline's flagship
- Worked vignette: a strong reading let down by its plates
- Reviewer-pushback patterns and the venue-specific countermove
- Calibration anchors (hedge where uncertain)
- Output format
- Supplementary resources
What does the artbull-review-process skill do?
Use to understand how The Art Bulletin evaluates a submission — double-blind peer review, what referees and the editor look for in art-historical work, and the likely decision outcomes. Helps anticipate review; it does not contact editors or simulate a specific referee.
How do I install it?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill artbull-review-process --agent claude-code` — it drops the skill into your project so the agent can pick it up. Swap the --agent value for codex, cursor or copilot if you use one of those.
Where does this skill come from?
From brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills, a repository with 909 stars. We read it straight from the repository tree rather than a submitted listing, so what you see here is what is actually published.
Is a popular skill a good skill?
Not necessarily. Stars measure attention, not adoption — a repository can trend for a week and be abandoned. That is why we show the weekly change from our own snapshots next to the total, instead of a single flattering number.