> For the complete documentation index, see [llms.txt](https://research.docs.laws.africa/llms.txt). Markdown versions of documentation pages are available by appending `.md` to page URLs; this page is available as [Markdown](https://research.docs.laws.africa/reviewing-and-approving/reviewing-a-work.md).

# Reviewing a work

{% hint style="info" %}
**What you will be able to do**

* Judge whether another researcher's indexing is ready to approve
* Give feedback the first researcher can act on
* Send it back, or approve it
  {% endhint %}

**Before you start:** you have completed Module 3, and you are the named reviewer for the project. Reviewers are named per project by the team; Indigo does not assign them.

{% hint style="info" %}
Every work is indexed by one person and reviewed by another. The review is where mistakes are caught before they reach the editorial team and the public. A good review checks the work against the source, and leaves the first researcher better equipped for the next one.
{% endhint %}

### Steps

1. Open **Source documents**, go to the **Reviewing** tab and open the document.
2. Open the source document beside it. If no gazette is attached to a work, check whether it could have been (see [Attaching the publication document](/reading-sources/sources-and-publication-documents.md)).
3. Check that every work the document contains is there. Count the laws in the source document against the linked works.
4. For each work, check the fields against the source document in this order: short title, type and subtype, number, year, publication name, number and date, start page, assent date, commencement, repeal, primary work.
5. Check the relationships: is everything the document amends, commences or repeals linked, dummied or covered by a link task?
6. If something needs fixing, leave a comment saying exactly which field is wrong and why, then click **Re-start indexing**. The document goes back to the first researcher.
7. If everything is right, approve each work and choose its task options (next lesson), then click **Finish review**.

{% hint style="success" %}
**Tip.** Finish review only closes the review. Indigo sends no notification, so if the first researcher needs to know the outcome, tell them.
{% endhint %}

### Judgement calls

* **The short title differs from the short title section,** even by a comma. The section wins. Return it, or fix it yourself if it is the only problem.
* **Commenced is ticked, but the Act says it commences on a date fixed by notice.** Wrong unless the notice exists and is linked. Return it.
* **A field is blank.** Ask whether it should be before calling it wrong. Some fields are blank by design: assent date for many by-laws, primary work for stubs and principal Acts, number for by-laws without numbers.

### Pitfalls

* Reviewing from memory instead of from the source document.
* Approving because the work "looks right" without checking its relationships.
* Vague feedback such as "please check". Name the field and the problem.
* Sending a document back with Re-start indexing but no comment.

### Check yourself

<details>

<summary><strong>The title field reads "Nursing Act 2004"; the short title section reads "Nursing Act, 2004". Approve?</strong></summary>

<mark style="color:$primary;">**Answer.**</mark> Not as it stands. The section wins, comma included. Correct it, or return it with a comment.

</details>

<details>

<summary><strong>A notice amends two works; only one is linked and there is no link task. What do you do?</strong></summary>

<mark style="color:$primary;">**Answer.**</mark> Re-start indexing with a comment: the second amendment must be linked, dummied or covered by a link task.

</details>