David Gerard wrote:
I don't see a problem with articles going through
a cycle of
well-written -> more details -> copyedited -> well-written. Of course,
as Ian points out, domain knowledge is important in the copyeditor!
(Or at least a talk page note "I've copyedited for flow and structure,
please fix any important detail I may have messed up" - an express
statement of non-OWNership.)
This would support the notion that we need more
sophisticated algorithms
for evaluating articles, style and content being only two of the more
important qualities to be tracked.
Ec