All articles are curated by a single senior expert on the article's topic.
In the simplest sense, article curatorship implies that each proposed revision to an article is vetted for visibility by the article curator. However, to minimize the burden of article maintenance on any one person, and eliminate the necessity for an article curator to address trivial revisions, Scholarpedia allows for Implicit approval.
For a revision to be implicitly approved, it must be approved by two of the article's contributors, and no article contributors can have voted to deny publication of the revision. If after one week a given revision has neither been approved nor rejected by the article's curator, but it has received the unanimous approval of at least two of the article's contributors, then the revision is deemed "implicitly approved" and is incorporated into the main article.
To ensure that non-curator article contributors mimic the decision-making process of the article's curator, they are rewarded for agreeing with the article curator regarding the appropriateness of a given edit. If the contributor's judgment is too often at odds with that of the curator, the contributor will lose the ability to vote on future potential revisions.