Issuepedia talk:Page Structure

It would also be beneficial to create a template for the citations themselves, again with some kind of "quality" rating, as well as a category (opinion/primary source/secondary/etc) and links to pages about the authors and publications involved. These pages could be used to discuss any perceived bias in the source authors or publications.

Yes to this as well -- same caveat as my comment on the other suggestion. The abiliity for users to rate things in various different, fine-grained ways is part of the design of InstaGov, which is one of my major focuses right now.

Each issue page should have a descriptive sidebar that helps categorize the issue (using one or more categories), provides a map of where the issue fits within its category, and provides a short description of how well-developed the issue page is.

"Well-developed" will require some definition and consensus. Some suggested axes to look at when determining overall quality:

• Number of sources cited
• Quality of sources cited (difficult to measure!)
• Quality of analysis (also difficult to measure)
• Stylistic quality (writing, links to other pages, images, etc)

This suggestion is in line with my own thinking. It may take awhile before I can get to it, though, as there's some pretty substantial coding involved. If any other coders (PHP, mainly) would like to get involved, that could help substantially; I can put together detailed design documents -- collaboratively, if anyone wants to be involved in the design process.