@Warren, good and glad to see this list.
1 - Foremost, there should be a set of categories (similar to the brief list in the 'blank' note for suggested things to write) which help assure good documentation. eg. I try to use some consistently, like: abstract, disclaimer, observations, data, analysis, hypotheses and conclusions if any.
2 - Any submitted material has to make "common sense". I know this is broad, but, for example, if a doc doesn't make sense to several 'reviewers', then it can't be 'accepted' unless that confusion can be eliminated.
3 - All material must follow a logical explanatory process. It can't start at 'A', then digress through 'B' and 'C' and conclude with 'D'. That is simply contrary to the scientific process.
4 - The document must not contain conjectures, guesses or speculation -- unless they are identified as such and have some added value to the document.
5 - The material should be relevant to the topics within PLab's scope. This doesn't exclude new topics and new ideas, it just means material shouldn't be obviously distracting or totally inappropriate to PLab.
6 - To avoid adding overhead, I'd suggest having a 'submission bucket' where existing and new docs can be identified as potential candidates.
7 - Since this is a PLab repository, I'd suggest there is therefore some upper abstract level of responsibility of 'PLab' to solicit specific help for reviewing what's in the bucket(s). It doesn't seem practical to ask or expect the herd of cats organize themselves.
8 - I'd suggest that such selected reviewers then contribute, as best they are able (time, money, coffee, etc) to add/checkbox/notes to a common 'whiteboard' form (not public to the general herd to keep the noise level down) to seek consensus.
9 - The result could be acceptance, acceptance with suggestions to the author, feedback to author with acceptance, pending on correction and removal from the 'submit bucket' (not removal from PLab notes in general).
10 - Conflicts. Yup, they will exist, but with the scientific process as a guide for all, they should, for the most part, be logically resolved.
11 - Even if this process doesn't work 100%, that's ok as 75% or whatever is likely to be a big improvement.
Once the above is filter has passed a document, then it can be bumped up for requesting