The author conducted a content analysis of papers submitted to the journal, "Communications in Information Literacy," from the years 2007-2013. The purpose was to investigate and report on the overall quality characteristics of a statistically significant sample of papers submitted to a single-topic, open access, library and information science (LIS) journal. Characteristics of manuscript submissions, authorship, reviewer evaluations, and editorial decisions were illuminated to provide context; particular emphasis was given to the analysis of major criticisms found in reviewer evaluations of rejected papers. Overall results were compared to previously published research. The findings suggest a trend in favor of collaborative authorship, and a possible trend toward a more practice-based literature. The findings also suggest a possible deterioration in some of the skills that are required of LIS authors relative to the preparation of scholarly papers. The author discusses potential implications for authors and the disciplinary literature, recommends directions for future research, and where possible, provides recommendations for the benefit of the greater community of LIS scholars.