webconf-review-process
Use when reasoning about how the Web Conference (WWW) evaluates papers — track-scoped double-blind review, the rebuttal-to-notification pipeline, how the ten research tracks shape reviewer expectations, main versus companion proceedings outcomes, and what authors can and cannot influence at each stage.
Profile →npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill webconf-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.
# Web Conference Review Process The Web Conference reviews papers **inside topical tracks**, and that single design choice explains most of what authors experience: who reviews the paper, what evidence bar applies, and why two similar papers can meet very different fates in the same year. This skill models the pipeline as verified for the 2026 edition; per-track reviewer counts, scoring scales, and meta-review mechanics were not published in verifiable sources and are marked 待核实 where they matter. ## Pipeline with 2026 anchors | Stage | 2026 date | Author-controllable? | |---|---|---| | Abstract registration | Sep 30, 2025 | Fully — track, title, final author list | | Full paper | Oct 7, 2025 | Fully | | Track review period | Oct-Nov 2025 | Not at all | | Rebuttal window | Nov 24 - Dec 1, 2025 | The one mid-process lever | | Track-chair / PC deliberation | Dec 2025 - Jan 2026 | Not at all | | Notification | Jan 13, 2026 | — | | Camera-ready | Jan 25, 2026 | Fully | Between December 1 and January 13 there is nothing an author can legitimately do. Emailing chairs with clarifications or new results during deliberation is at best ignored and at worst remembered. ## What track scoping m
- Pipeline with 2026 anchors
- What track scoping means for your reviews
- The venue's recurring decision logic
- Confidentiality and integrity
- Translating review language
- Reading the outcome
- Output format
What does the webconf-review-process skill do?
Use when reasoning about how the Web Conference (WWW) evaluates papers — track-scoped double-blind review, the rebuttal-to-notification pipeline, how the ten research tracks shape reviewer expectations, main versus companion proceedings outcomes, and what authors can and cannot influence at each stage.
How do I install it?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill webconf-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.