Little Cup QC Process

Ray Jay

"Jump first, ask questions later, oui oui!"
is a Site Content Manager Alumnusis a Community Leader Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Top Contributor Alumnusis a Smogon Media Contributor Alumnus
Hello everyone,

Some people have raised questions regarding what the QC process is to be, so I wanted to make this post to clear it up.

THE QC TEAM:

Active Members
Corporal Levi
H&MBerkeley
kingmidas
OP
Mambo
Melonz
Star.
Tahu
ThatCrazyRussian
The Avalanches
Tricking

Members on break:
apt-get
blarajan
Heysup
macle
prem
QuoteCS
sparktrain
Yagura

WIP: This tag means the analysis is not ready for QC. Use this tag while you are still working your skeleton. Avoid making a lot of comments on the analysis at this point, especially if you're not a QC member.

Quality Control: This tag means the skeleton is complete and is ready for QC members to look over it. Once 3 approvals have been given from QC members, the analysis writer may begin writing. Analyses in this stage should have titles appended with (QC x/3). Otherwise, they may not be checked by QC members.

Copyediting: This tag means the analysis is written. It helps if you can leave your analysis with the tag "Quality Control" and (QC 3/3) until it is completely written. Once your analysis is completely written, it needs to be looked over by one of the QC members one last time (this can be one of the 3 that stamped it in the first place). Once a QC member has made sure you have not missed anything, you may append your analysis title with (GP 0/2) and allow the GP team to begin checking it.

Done: This tag is reserved for analyses that have received 3 QC checks, been written, been checked by a QC member again, and then received the 2 GP checks.

These tags can easily be changed by hovering over the Thread Tools button at the top right of your analysis thread(s), and should always be updated immediately before moving on to the next stage of writing. This will help keep your work organized as well as keep everyone on the same page, writers and QC members alike. Keep in mind that non-QC members are not barred from sharing input in your analysis thread(s), but the final say for recommended updates and changes is determined by Quality Control.

This is the way we are doing this in order to help out some of our newer contributors who are just getting into analysis writing. This C&C project is headed by Rowan and macle. Thank you and feel free to shoot a PM to either one of them, Mambo, or OP if you have any other questions.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I wasn't really sure the best place to post this, but I was wondering why we talk about QC checks out of 3, when we're basically giving them 4. I understand that it could be helpful to stay consistent with other tiers, but it seems to cause more confusion and annoyances that it is helpful. I like the system of having 4 checks and I think it's very beneficial to ensure an analysis gets done thoroughly, but I don't see any good reason for us to not refer to the last check as a fourth QC check. This was brought up in the Pancham analysis and I just wanted to clarify why we used this system or if we could possibly change it.
 

tehy

Banned deucer.
http://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/mienfoo-baton-pass-qc-3-3-gp-0-2.3527169/

As a result of the current system i.e. qc X/3 then 'final check', a gp check was wasted. In addition, i wanted to amcheck this afterwards, but i'm still not sure if it counts as ready:

kavatika said:
I'm gonna wait until you implement this before I give you the go-ahead.
Is that implement and then go ahead, or is kavatika planning to return and give the go-ahead after implementation? (Zero disrespect to kavatika on this one.) A simple qc 4/4 or lack of it would make this easy to understand.


So, why not X/4? The check isn't really different from normal qc checks, except in 2 ways

1: it's after the write-up

Many tiers have the final check after the writeup and it's been done in the past plenty too, so this isn't a big deal.

2.it's doable by the same qc member who did one of the other 3 checks

This is a difference, but not a huge one. It's a policy you could easily get rid of, and even if you didn't, only QC members need to pay attention to this rule.

In short, is there really a reason not to move to a title system of X/4
 

macle

sup geodudes
is a Top Tutor Alumnusis a Site Content Manager Alumnusis a Social Media Contributor Alumnusis an Artist Alumnusis a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Top Contributor Alumnusis a Smogon Media Contributor Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Moderator Alumnus
I wasn't really sure the best place to post this, but I was wondering why we talk about QC checks out of 3, when we're basically giving them 4. I understand that it could be helpful to stay consistent with other tiers, but it seems to cause more confusion and annoyances that it is helpful. I like the system of having 4 checks and I think it's very beneficial to ensure an analysis gets done thoroughly, but I don't see any good reason for us to not refer to the last check as a fourth QC check. This was brought up in the Pancham analysis and I just wanted to clarify why we used this system or if we could possibly change it.
i agree lets change it to x/4.
 

Berks

has a Calm Mind
is a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnusis a Smogon Media Contributor Alumnus
Here's the new outline again cause someone moved Kavatika's thread and I'll need it later
[OVERVIEW]

Generalize what the Pokemon does in the metagame and as a whole and why you should or shouldn't consider using it on your teams.

[SET]
name: SET NAME
move 1:
move 2:
move 3:
move 4:
item:
ability:
nature:
evs:

[SET COMMENTS]
Moves
========

Describe what the moves on the set do.

Set Details
========

Describe the other aspects of the set such as what the EVs do and nature/item.

Usage Tips
========

Describe how to use the Pokemon in question.

Team Options
========

Describe some teammates that would be a good idea to pair with this Pokemon.

[STRATEGY COMMENTS]
Other Options
=============

List some options for the Pokemon user that are plausible but not always recommended due to either being not consistent enough or too outclassed by other Pokemon in the metagame.

Checks and Counters
===================

**Insert Threat Here**: Describe why the Pokemon is a threat.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 1, Guests: 0)

Top