Types of Writing Template 1
Type selector Reader needs to: [experience/understand/evaluate/decide/do] Primary type: [x] Specific genre: [x] Secondary mode needed: [x] Evidence/craft requirement: [x] Tone/convention: [x]
Start with structure, then replace every placeholder with information that is true, relevant, and natural for your context. These templates are intentionally skeletal so your final writing does not sound mass-produced.
A useful types-of-writing guide helps the writer choose a dominant purpose instead of treating categories as rigid boxes. The classification should explain what the reader needs, what evidence or craft carries the piece, and which neighboring modes may appear inside the same document.
Type selector Reader needs to: [experience/understand/evaluate/decide/do] Primary type: [x] Specific genre: [x] Secondary mode needed: [x] Evidence/craft requirement: [x] Tone/convention: [x]
Writing-type comparison Type A: [x] Primary job: [x] Typical evidence/craft: [x] Common genres: [x] Type B: [x] Key difference: [x]
Assignment translation Prompt verb: [analyze/explain/describe/argue/narrate] Required genre: [x] Dominant writing mode: [x] Supporting mode: [x] Structure implication: [x]
Mixed-mode map Document: [x] Opening mode: [x] Evidence section mode: [x] Interpretation mode: [x] Closing mode: [x] Primary purpose that controls all sections: [x]
Purpose-and-verification decision audit for Types of Writing: real writing job → [ ]; plausible choice A → [ ]; plausible choice B → [ ]; downstream consequence of each → [ ]; facts/evidence/canon to verify → [ ]; reader or genre boundary → [ ]; final purpose-fit reason → [ ].
Publication-readiness audit for Types of Writing: claim/advice/example → [ ]; strongest available source tier → [ ]; important disagreement or uncertainty → [ ]; what would change the conclusion → [ ]; publish now / qualify / revise / hold → [ ]; final verifier or source of truth → [ ].
Provenance and classification audit for Types of Writing: draft statement/example → [ ]; classify as fact / interpretation / recommendation / convention / original example → [ ]; source or internal provenance → [ ]; source date / version / checked date → [ ]; attribution needed → [ ]; recency risk → [ ]; final publishable wording → [ ].
Source-record and update audit for Types of Writing: statement / example → [ ]; external fact, project fact, interpretation, recommendation, convention, or original example → [ ]; controlling first-party / primary source → [ ]; secondary source if used → [ ]; source record / locator → [ ]; date or version checked → [ ]; update trigger → [ ]; publish / qualify / revise / hold → [ ].
Source-ledger and revision-history audit for Types of Writing: claim / recommendation / example → [ ]; source or project record ID → [ ]; source status active / superseded / corrected / retracted / retired → [ ]; claim-level last verified date/version → [ ]; event that triggered recheck → [ ]; correction / withdrawal action → [ ]; reader-facing disclosure needed? → [ ]; what changed and why → [ ]; prior wording/version retained at → [ ].
Claim/source status audit: Item [claim/source/example] | Status [active / review due / stale / corrected / retracted / superseded] | Controlling source/version [x] | Last verified [date/version] | Stale trigger [x] | Correction severity [0–3] | Reader disclosure [none / note / correction / withdrawal] | Changelog entry [what changed + why].
Dependency and propagation audit: Claim / example / recommendation [x] | Controlling source / project record [x] | Dependency strength [direct / shared / advisory / independent] | Review trigger / reason code [x] | Needs-review scope [local / direct dependents / cluster] | Replacement source requirements [x] | Carry-forward decision [x] | Propagation targets [x] | Reader disclosure / changelog action [x].
Persistent editorial registry audit: Topic slug → [ ]; claim UID/key → [ ]; source UID/key → [ ]; dependency UID + strength → [ ]; source status/version → [ ]; open review UID/reason/priority → [ ]; replacement source if any → [ ]; reviewer + resolution → [ ].