conbio-review-process
Use to understand how Conservation Biology evaluates a manuscript — double-blind peer review (adopted 2014), editorial screening for scope/novelty/conservation relevance, the editorial-board structure, decision categories, and the Registered Reports route. Sets expectations and shapes the paper to survive review; it does not contact editors.
Profile →npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill conbio-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 (conbio-review-process) Knowing how *Conservation Biology* screens and decides lets you pre-empt the failure modes before submitting. The journal is **double-blind** (adopted October 2014) and screens at the desk for scope, novelty, and conservation relevance before external review. ## When to trigger - Before submitting, to stress-test against desk-rejection grounds - Deciding whether to use the **Registered Reports** route (where offered) - Interpreting a decision letter and setting expectations - Understanding what reviewers are instructed to weigh ## How review works 1. **Double-blind.** Neither authors nor reviewers know each other's identities; the manuscript and the authors' identities are anonymized (see `conbio-submission`). Adopted to reduce intentional and unintentional bias and broaden participation. 2. **Editorial screening first.** An editor (and, in the journal's editorial structure, regional/ handling editors) screens for **fit and conservation relevance**, **novelty/transferability**, adequate **English and completeness**, and **ethics**. Papers that are sound but inconsequential, or purely local/descriptive, are common desk rejections. 3. **Extern
- When to trigger
- How review works
- Shape the paper to pass
- Desk-rejection triage (self-run before upload)
- What Conservation Biology reviewers are asked to weigh
- Anti-patterns
- Review-risk pass for Conservation Biology
- Output format
- Supplementary resources
What does the conbio-review-process skill do?
Use to understand how Conservation Biology evaluates a manuscript — double-blind peer review (adopted 2014), editorial screening for scope/novelty/conservation relevance, the editorial-board structure, decision categories, and the Registered Reports route. Sets expectations and shapes the paper to survive review; it does not contact editors.
How do I install it?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill conbio-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.