Maintain and improve our editorial quality standards
make sure there are no inaccuracies, typos, etc. and an article is not too repetitive, long, etc. and html/media work properly, etc.; a similar level of expertise should be required to translators and each Lingua group should work also on quality assurance (even if in both cases, this is not always achievable, of course), because projects as Lingua are becoming a blueprint for the Net as a whole [this belongs better to the translation xchange-only wiki only, but... - bernardo.parrella]
Tamara Nigi commented
[With regard to Huffington Post, it might be a bit difficult to apply the 'relevant opinion' principle in qualitative terms to an average GV post. It seems to me that in some cases it is more of a 'how many opinions should I record' problem.
Probably not all posts need to be long. While representing a pattern of similar and opposing views in any single post is probably part of the GV job/mission, appeal to a portion of the readership may fade when an article becomes too descriptive, although there may be cultural implications in the way people perceive length Vs brevity (and description Vs discussion)
if we really want to put in place an editorial training program of course more specific ideas, discussion and place are needed, but a starting point could be to lay down some (as clear and specific as possible) guidelines that each author should follow and editors enforce - ie this "publishing standards" implemented at huffington post: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/07/citizen-journalism-publis_n_184075.html
Georgia Popplewell commented
This gets my vote but agree with Solana that it's rather abstract. Any one with ideas on how a an editorial training program might be designed and implemented, for instance?
This is a good thing to work towards but is a little abstract as a suggestion in this forum. Any specific working methods or ideas for how to do this?
yes, yes, yes!