Wikinews:Water cooler/policy/archives/2010/April

Reviewer's responsibility
Well, after recent discussions at WN:AAA and User talk:ShakataGaNai, I decided that maybe it's worth clarifying what exactly reviewers are supposed to do, if anything at all, and what level of responsibility they have of the stuff they publish. I don't think this is currently not very specific in policy. I'm personally of the opinion that reviewers have to have some sort of pressure/responsibility on them to do review things conscientiously, to have at least some quality control, but others disagree. Thoughts? Tempodivalse [talk]  21:26, 18 April 2010 (UTC)


 * My tentative thoughts on this subject are expressed in a section I've just been drafting today on my (non-canonical, but that's another issue) Tips on reviewing articles page: Tips on reviewing articles.


 * I was actually thinking of asking here whether people think my numbers on time-to-review are plausible. --Pi zero (talk) 21:42, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
 * (I've taken out the specific times entirely; it felt too close to prescriptive. --Pi zero (talk) 23:18, 18 April 2010 (UTC))