One long article into multi-platform copy without altering a single fact
Recipe template · not yet tested on this site
This page is a recipe template, not yet tested here. Run logs, tokens and time go in after re-testing; until then no estimated numbers are filled in.
When to use
One long article must become a short post, a microblog entry, and a video script. The fear is numbers shifting, conclusions inflating, and cases getting attached to the wrong claim.
Preparation
- Host version
- To fill (record the exact rc version when testing)
- Model
- To fill
- Mode / permissions
- Standard mode + modify-within-workspace is enough to start
- Plugins required
- None (add name & version after testing if used)
- Input materials
- Keep in a separate workspace; back up originals first
Full instruction
Read article.md and rewrite it into three pieces: a short-form post (under 300 characters), a microblog entry (under 140), and a 60-second spoken script (about 220 characters).
[Hard constraint: facts]
- Every number, date, person, place, organisation, and quotation in the original is preserved verbatim. No conversion, no rounding, no 'about'.
- Where the original says 'some', 'most', or 'research suggests', the rewrite must not upgrade it to 'all', 'everyone', or 'studies show'.
- A causal claim (A causes B) must not become a correlational one, and vice versa.
[Output]
End each piece with a 'fact check' section listing every number and proper noun in it, with its location in the original (paragraph number or the source sentence).
Requirements:
1. Each piece stands alone; never write 'as mentioned above'.
2. Platform differences show up in the opening and the length, not in fact density — all three carry the same facts.
3. If a platform's length cannot fit a key qualifier from the original (say 'only holds under X'), keep the qualifier and cut decoration rather than dropping it for brevity.
4. Report at the end: how many numbers per piece, and whether any claim could not be traced to the original.Run log
| Item | Value | Note |
|---|---|---|
| Time spent | to be tested | |
| Result | to be tested | |
| In / out tokens | to be tested | |
| Leftovers | to be tested |
Output
After a successful run, list files and screenshots here, and note whether originals changed.
Acceptance checklist
Tap to tick each item off as you verify.
- Numbers in all three pieces match the original exactly, checked one by one
- No upgraded phrasing such as 'all' or 'studies show'
- Each piece has a fact-check section whose citations resolve
- Key qualifiers survive in all three
- Nothing appears in any piece that cannot be traced to the original
Failures & boundaries
- The fact-check section is the point of this recipe. Remove it and you have ordinary rewriting with no way to verify
- Platform limits collide with 'do not drop qualifiers'; rule 3 resolves it by keeping the qualifier. State it explicitly or the model decides for you
- If the original is internally inconsistent (numbers that do not add up), the rewrite copies that contradiction three times. Proofread the source first
- Blocked on: Runnable, but proving no fact was altered needs a real published long-form piece carrying real figures and names. Synthetic text cannot show whether a number gets quietly swapped.