Difference between revisions of "Conservapedia talk:How to write an article"
(→"Sweeping" condemnations: new section) |
|||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
"''Never imply that a sweeping condemnation of liberal evils is "wrong" or "exaggerated".''": I would rather say, "Never make ''sweeping'' condemnation of liberal evils". Condemnation of ''specific'' evils is okay, but ''sweeping'' condemnation should always be avoided, I would think. I also have reservations about other aspects of this proposal. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 00:30, 30 August 2008 (EDT) | "''Never imply that a sweeping condemnation of liberal evils is "wrong" or "exaggerated".''": I would rather say, "Never make ''sweeping'' condemnation of liberal evils". Condemnation of ''specific'' evils is okay, but ''sweeping'' condemnation should always be avoided, I would think. I also have reservations about other aspects of this proposal. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 00:30, 30 August 2008 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | :Reading it again, this doesn't actually say "how to write an article" at all. It seems to be about what to do - or what not to do - with an existing article. There is already a [[Conservapedia:Guidelines]] page - should this content be proposed & discussed as an addition to the guidelines, rather than a stand-alone article or essay? [[User:Sideways|Sideways]] 09:10, 30 August 2008 (EDT) | ||
Revision as of 13:10, August 30, 2008
Isn't this implying that editors should discuss proposed changes to an article before editing? And isn't that a contradiction of the 90/10 rule, which suggests that constructive editing is better than talk? Sideways 16:32, 29 August 2008 (EDT)
Carte blanche?
This entire article is deeply troubling, and that's coming from somebody who is by God no fan of liberals. It appears to be a carte blanche that justifies bashing of liberals and protects such articles from correction - especially without some sort of definition of "liberal evil" or who gets to decide what counts as such. For hopefully obvious reasons, I oppose the current version of this guideline. --DirkB 17:02, 29 August 2008 (EDT)
"Sweeping" condemnations
"Never imply that a sweeping condemnation of liberal evils is "wrong" or "exaggerated".": I would rather say, "Never make sweeping condemnation of liberal evils". Condemnation of specific evils is okay, but sweeping condemnation should always be avoided, I would think. I also have reservations about other aspects of this proposal. Philip J. Rayment 00:30, 30 August 2008 (EDT)
- Reading it again, this doesn't actually say "how to write an article" at all. It seems to be about what to do - or what not to do - with an existing article. There is already a Conservapedia:Guidelines page - should this content be proposed & discussed as an addition to the guidelines, rather than a stand-alone article or essay? Sideways 09:10, 30 August 2008 (EDT)