The review process gives authors feedback which they use to improve their paper before it's published, and authors usually appreciate that.

It's also a chance to stop major errors being published, and again authors usually appreciate things like that being caught before the paper becomes public.

I mean, why not though? We do it with wikipedia. Maybe a publication could be submitted for review, but not made public (like, its up on the wiki, but not 'publicly view-able yet, only available to editors).

This is what happens, it's the "peer review" thing being described. The reviews are issued so that corrections can be made before publication.

Wikipedia/ Stackoverflow style review process. Also, ffs can we get hyperlinked citations? Its fung ridiculous that I can't just click the link for your citation and go to that paper.