lucy24 - 11:49 am on Mar 17, 2012 (gmt 0)
To me, it is as if he is just describing Wikipedia
Does the article provide original content or information, original reporting, original research, or original analysis?
Wikipedia absolutely hates original research. They put up huge warning flags when they suspect an article might contain anything original.
Is the content mass-produced by or outsourced to a large number of creators, or spread across a large network of sites, so that individual pages or sites donít get as much attention or care?
This is getting interesting. You're expected to read the writer's mind and figure out which questions are supposed to get a Yes and which ones should be No. And if you get it backward...
Does this article contain insightful analysis or interesting information that is beyond obvious?
Didn't he just get through saying something about careful editing? It would have come in handy here. I don't think he intended "beyond obvious" to mean what it sounds like. (But see above about getting it backward.)