Conservapedia talk:How to write an article

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)

It's not a general rule. It applies only to disputes between conservatives and liberals. You can fix the bumper sticker article without prior discussion. --Ed Poor ^Talk 09:13, 30 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)

Neither. I think I speak for the Project Director on this.

But you're right; it should be merged into the guidelines somehow. Got any ideas? --Ed Poor ^Talk 09:15, 30 August 2008 (EDT)

...yeah, I got an idea. Both Philip and I voiced criticism of this "proposed guideline" (with Philip implicitly reserving the right of voicing more), so maybe you should address those before marching ahead and turning your "proposed guideline" into an actual guideline. And if the "Project Director" (A. Schlafly?) supports such a liberal-bashing amnesty, I would be quite disturbed. An encyclopedia project shouldn't bash anybody, regardless of the own position. --DirkB 14:45, 30 August 2008 (EDT)

I would think that if and when this is approved, then it gets transferred to the Guidelines page. Philip J. Rayment 02:53, 31 August 2008 (EDT)