There is a description
here of the editorial process. The structure of their editorial board is
here. All peer review processes look pretty much alike, however. Stuff like:
The review should be critical and objective
Check for plagiarism.
Does the article adhere to the project's standards?
Does it adhere to style guidelines, in terms of structure, length etc.
Content – no original research
Is it appropriate for target audience? E.g. Would the article be of interest to readers?
Does the summary reflect the contents of the article?
All significant claims adequately sourced?
Recommendations – reject, accept with minor changes, accept with major changes, accept as seen