phg-review-process
Use when anticipating how a Progress in Human Geography (PiHG) review essay will be judged — the double-anonymous review model, decision categories, and the desk-reject triggers specific to a review journal. Explains what to expect; it does not draft the manuscript or the response letter.
Profile →npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill phg-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 (phg-review-process) Understanding how PiHG judges a submission lets you pre-empt the objections a review essay draws. PiHG is **double-anonymous**, and its reviewers are typically **senior figures in the sub-field** who know the literature you are reviewing intimately. They ask a different question than an empirical journal's referees: not "are the methods sound?" but "**does this command the field, and does it move it forward?**" ## When to trigger - Before submission, to stress-test against likely reviewer objections - Interpreting a decision letter's category and tone (then route to `phg-rebuttal`) - Deciding whether a critique in review is fixable or fatal - Calibrating how ambitious the intervention can be for this venue ## What PiHG reviewers weigh | Criterion | The question | Where to fix pre-submission | |-----------|--------------|-----------------------------| | **Command of the literature** | Is coverage complete, current, fair, and correctly attributed? | `phg-literature-positioning` | | **Synthesis** | Do the sources add up to one argument, or is this a list? | `phg-argument-synthesis` | | **Critical intervention** | Does it say something the field do
- When to trigger
- What PiHG reviewers weigh
- Desk-reject triggers (review-journal-specific)
- Likely reviewer objections → the pre-emption
- Decision categories (verify current wording on SAGE)
- Checklist
- Anti-patterns
- Output format
- Supplementary resources
What does the phg-review-process skill do?
Use when anticipating how a Progress in Human Geography (PiHG) review essay will be judged — the double-anonymous review model, decision categories, and the desk-reject triggers specific to a review journal. Explains what to expect; it does not draft the manuscript or the response letter.
How do I install it?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill phg-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.