Conservapedia talk:Writing plan

From Conservapedia
This is the current revision of Conservapedia talk:Writing plan as edited by JonM (Talk | contribs) at 04:29, January 11, 2012. This URL is a permanent link to this version of this page.

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

Good to see the rule under which I was blocked finally being written.--Tom Moorefiat justitia ruat coelum 14:38, 27 May 2008 (EDT)

I'll note that I tried asking a user to do this once on Wikipedia. My request was quickly shot down with the edit summary "rv disruptive trolling (which won't result in the offender being blocked, of course)". My attempt to enforce this backfired.

Feh. --Elkman 00:26, 3 June 2008 (EDT)

Is this a new Commandment? Human 02:38, 31 August 2008 (EDT)

Perhaps someone could better illustrate what a writing plan is. I got blocked for asking what one was, when it was demanded of me, and this article doesn't make it clear at all. --RonAbdul 14:38, 25 December 2008 (EST)


I think it would be helpful if this page linked to some examples of well-received writing plans, to give some guidance as to the expectations. Do any such examples exist? -- I don't think in my time at CP I ever saw anyone actually submit a writing plan, they tended to just get banned. --MarkGall 13:59, 6 August 2011 (EDT)

It's similiar to 90/10; the idea is to cut down discussion and get an editor focued on mainspace contribs. Ed is the only sysop I've ever seen do this [1], but sysops do not have the power to issue instructions to editors anymore. Rob Smith 14:50, 6 August 2011 (EDT)
Let me be clear on this, it appears a recent block was for failure to follow instructions to submit a writing plan, whereas the idea is supposed to be submit a writing plan to get unblocked, I think. Rob Smith 14:54, 6 August 2011 (EDT)
That may be the idea, but has anyone actually submitted a writing plan, ever? If not it seems this might not be a very effective policy (or it's extremely effective, if the goal is just to give a premise for blocking) --MarkGall 15:10, 6 August 2011 (EDT)


This seems great, especially if a large, potentially controversial article is added. I would like to see it used more.JonM 23:29, 10 January 2012 (EST)