Context is good. "Just like any other page" may not be the right recipie, but some frigging idea of what the story's about would be quite useful. Ditto the current status, votes, views, etc., on the story.
Irony notwithstanding, topical comments shouldn't be required (this story should be posted already IMO).
Disagreeing with Rusty's comments -- titles alone are not enough, and "cute" or obscure titles which hide meaning are frankly really annoying. You can pull that kind of shit in print 'coz it only takes a half second to flip to the full contents or the page with the story and full context. The typical K5 article takes at least ten seconds to open (56k line), far longer if I've got contention for 'Net access. This latency is too high for obfuscatory titles. Some of the IWETHEY crowd may recall the battle with InfoWorld regarding this when a site revamp went to headlines only. This also argues for making the article summaries much shorter. I'd cap them at about 300 characters (50 words). My first paragraph is 35 words, and would suffice to introduce this post as an article, IMVAO.
As usual, Jakob Nielsen has something to say regarding this, it's called microcontent. His broader set of usability guidelines is also recommended.
And, for the full rip on what's wrong (and how to fix) the submission queue, see the Meatball Wiki node.
Nutshell summary (microcontent ;-): ditch the queue, authors write to diaries, items can be voted up, into sections (if the author's indicated this is OK), non-promoted articles remain as diary items. Moderation of articles within sections continues after posting, and affects article placement, subject to a time dwell penalty.
Karsten M. Self
SCO -- backgrounder on Caldera/SCO vs IBM
Support the EFF!!
There is no K5 cabal.
[ Parent ]