Toward a composing Model of Reading

Right off the bat, I know I used the planning and drafting functions the most but I used the others as well, just not as much.  As far as planning goes, once I had picked my topic, I started sifting through google pages on Lake Snowden to try and get mass information so I could start focusing and narrowing down topics to be used in my article. What makes a wikipedia article legitimate and good enough not to end up on the "deletion suggestion" page is the sources, which you search for and find, and accept or reject your sources or "backbone" of your wiki writing.  I managed to find several sources I liked well enough to write an article on Lake Snowden.  Next I went into the drafting stage, which took some time.. reading many sources, getting information and deciding what to use, what not to, and how you are going to bring it all together in your own words into writing with sourced information.  Once the first two steps are done, you're not out of the woods, but I thought the rest was way easier.  Aligning a neutral wikipedia article was not too bad, just making sure the text was objective then grouping categories together that go together.  Like aligning, I thought revising was relatively easy as well but still important.  You can't have an online encyclopedia article with writing errors... Immediately looses you a good chunk of credibility.  All it took was a few re readings and having a friend read it to catch any errors I might have made.  With monitoring, I feel like I can easily distance myself from my objective article and evaluate it.  I think planning and drafting should have dominated over the others, and they did in my paper.  I'm not saying I ignored the others, just spent less time on them because I didn't need to focus on  them as much to write a wikipedia article.