Ensuring high quality sources where needed, especially science/academic topics (narrow focus)

Q1:

• Putting more forward those <1.5KB articles similar to what we discussed here
• Awards for editors who edited X uniques articles during the year something similar to project assessment awards with different level of awards and run every year.

Those proposals will increase the numbers of contributors on <1.5KB articles while it won't guaranty an upgrade in quality, it will at least increase drastically the probability to have a <1.5KB article meeting a subject "expert" editor. Yea, that just rolling more often the dice hopping to roll a 6.

Q2

• Flagged revisions
• Mediation, arbitration, any solution ending by -ion.

That technically not within Quality scope but the "Forced" consensus/compromise as discussed in Task Force/Health is the most suited tool in some deadlocks.

As far as I am concerned these issues are withing the Quality scope (as soon as they concern quality of course, not per se).