Conceived by Ray Jay. Approved by Fatecrashers. Thread title thanks to Fatecrashers.

It has been brought to the GP Team's attention that there has been an influx of new amateur GP checkers. Thus, we've come up with an idea to help amateur checkers get on the track and learn the ropes of GP checking. Some of you, amateur checkers, might even find yourself becoming an official GP checker!

Here are a few useful links to help you get started:

• Spelling and Grammar Standards
• Analysis Formatting Guide
• Check like the Prose: A Guide to GP
• Check like the Prose: Vol 2
• Smogon Grammar and Prose 101 - Helpful Tips and the Basics

And a couple of links if you want to learn more about grammar:

• Purdue OWL
• Grammar & Punctuations
• Grammar Index

Alright, so, let's get to the main point.

How this works

• Every few days to a week, a short paragraph will be posted in this thread for amateur GP checkers to try GP checking
• Those who are attempting to GP check the paragraphs can do so and post their checks here in hide tags
• After a few days, a member of the GP Team will post an answer key for participants to refer to

Participants can consult GP Team members if they have any questions after the release of each answer key


Objectives

• To give opportunities for amateur GP checkers to practice GPing consistently
• To enable amateur GP checkers to clarify doubts
• Improve amateur GP checkers' standards on a large scale basis
• Empower amateur GP checkers to improve and push them to become official GP checkers
• Allow amateur GP checkers to learn from their mistakes if any

Note that this is not a compulsory activity but why would you want to miss out on a chance to sharpen your skills? ^_^ If you have any questions relating to GP, you may ask in this thread or hop on #grammar!

edit: GPers who want to do an answer key can contact me via PM or VM (before you do the answer key x.x)~ Thanks! :)

All right, let's start with this! ^_^

Awesome idea! I'll try my hand at the sample paragraph when I have the time.

Question: Should GP Checks include changes to phrases that aren't technically incorrect, but would make the writing sound better? Some of these changes would be subjective to the writer and the editor/s.

If the change improves the prose, yes you can (and should). Prose is an important part of GP too. You can leave a comment saying that you've made an optional to make the prose better.

hi sandz
it's been a long time i've written
and i realize i've actually never done a gp
so here it goes i guess

Not to take a dig at you personally Amarillo, but to all amateur/hopeful GP checkers (and to some of you CERTIFIED MEMBERS also):

A copypastable version is nice, but should only really be done on request. The reason we highlight the changes is to hopefully help users improve their own grammar, thus not only reducing the workload, but up the quality across the site overall. Especially in this thread where we are trying to gauge your ability, it is important to highlight what you have done (and if possible, why). This not only helps us see where you went wrong/right, but for real checks, helps highlight certain areas or points the writer needs to address.

It's not a big problem, but avoiding laziness by not giving c/p versions goes a long way.

I gotta disagree with Zy tbh :/

aside from the fact that I've found writers overlook highlighted changes much more often than I'd like -- which is the main reason why I myself always provide c/ps, but this isn't the place for that so sorry for sidetracking! -- it's always convenient to be able to easily read the final version, particularly if punctuation is marked up as <period> / (add comma) / etc, there are lots of comments (I expect much more of this than usual considering the nature of this exercise), or just lots of changes in general.

also, I'm not sure how sandshrewz plans to go about this next part, but it might be easier to give feedback if a c/p is provided - whoever's giving comments won't have to implement the check if they need to lift out sentences or phrases to illustrate or better explain a point. (sorry that this sounds so vague and unclear, but, yeah, I myself had to when I was going through something with sandz earlier today, so imo there are definitely situations in which a c/p can come in handy, even in a mere practice exercise as this.)

im sorry for clogging your thread with irrelevance sandz!

Wait, I'm not on GeePee yet, lemme try this!

Looking at Heracross's stats(add comma), its Attack stat instantly jumps out at you reaching a whooping 383 unboosted. Due to this(add comma), Heracross can utilize a Choice Scarf to become a potent revenge killer or an efficient late game sweeper. Heracross's options don’'t (Change Apostrophe)end there; it can use a Choice Band or Status Orb to become a powerhouse capable of 2HKOing much of the UU tier metagame (add comma),but however(add comma), this does nothing to fix his its middling speed. Heracross has great synergy with Chandelure and can form a very potent offensive core as Chandelure's two absolute counters (add comma),(Porygon2 and Snorlax)(add comma), are handily taken down by Heracross while Chandelure can certainly dent the bulky Ghosts that check Heracross. Heracross can be slapped on to any team with little to none support which makes Heracross a choice to be considered whenever making a team. The reason Heracross needs little support is that it can heavily damage most of the UU tier metagame with its two STAB moves(add comma), Close Combat and Megahorn.

EDIT- Wow, 2 min check, idk If this is good or not D:

edit: aww that art is so cute

The two major changes are primarily re-ordering of material.

placeholder



I'm pretty rusty D: I'll be back in full swing when school ends next week! ^_^

whooping... ewww....

Also "due to this..." ewww....

edit: looking through it again, I'd probably reassign the analysis if the Overview started like this lol

you sure found a good example of crap sand. :P

Wait, is this an actual example from an actual analysis? In the interest of respecting writers, perhaps should we not use actual examples?

the writer himself donated the paragraph calm down

I'm already all up on this shit. I'll wait for the next one.

...

---

Looking at Heracross's stats its Attack stat instantly jumps out at you reaching a whooping 383 unboosted.

...

---

When one looks at Heracross's stats, its Attack stat stands out as it reaches an outstanding 383 even without a boost. Due Thanks to this,(add comma) Heracross can utilize a Choice Scarf to become a potent revenge killer or an efficient late game sweeper. Heracross's options don’t end there; it can use a Choice Band or status Orb to become a powerhouse capable of 2HKOing much of the UU tier.(period) Unfotunately, using a Choice Band or a status Orb does nothing to fix his Heracross's middling Speed. Heracross has great synergy with Chandelure and can form a very potent effective offensive core with it, as Chandelure's two absolute counters (Porygon2 and Snorlax) biggest counters: Snorlax and Porygon2 are can handily be taken down by Heracross,(add comma) while Chandelure can certainly dent the bulky Ghosts Ghost-types that check Heracross, such as..... Heracross can be slapped on to any team with little to none support which makes Heracross a choice to be considered whenever making a team. (This sentence is irrelevant) The reason Heracross needs little support is that as it can heavily damage most of the UU tier with its two STAB moves: Close Combat and Megahorn.

Here goes nothing....

add
remove
Double spaces are removed.



I didn't like how I felt like rewriting every other sentence. Perhaps I'm just too lazy when it comes to bbcode tags?

I'm not really bothered if there's a cp or not. There's pros and cons on both sides anyway. Without a cp, I feel that the writer actually makes the effort to see what's changed and learn from it, but sometimes writers also make mistakes while implementing checks though it shouldn't be the case. CPs are good especially when you read through all the changes and agree with all of them. It'll just save a bit of time for the writer. A rule of thumb for amateur GP checkers, if you're using the diff app, make sure that you provide a check with the changes marked out even when the diff app screwed up. You'll have to diff the changes paragraph by paragraph. GPers cannot stamp a check without the knowing what changes have been made. I'm fine with having a cp (since I don't have the power to not allow cps anyway haha). Just make sure that your changes can be seen! :)

@sirn: actually if I'm going to comment on a check I'll probably just take out the relevant parts with the mark ups lol. I will probably be commenting on checks that have made an error and explain the error(s). I won't be doing so for checks that actually didn't commit any errors but left out a few changes.

I saw your check ~_~ brb slapping Chou. Chou you've hurt someone's feelings!! ):< lol

If I'm using an actual analysis, I'll get permission from the author first. No worries!

I have no idea what this post mean... ._____.

Anyway, loving the good response here! ^_^ Thanks for participating everyone~! If you have any suggestions, feel free to bring it up. Just a note to everyone: no need to check for content here. It's not an Overview or anything x) I'd rather you just focus on the grammar and prose than the content for this practice.

Just posting to say, the answers will be coming up in 24 hours! If anyone else wants to do a check within this time, you can still do so! :)

Thanks for participating! ^_^

This is going to suck but what the hell

Add
Remove
Comments

Ding Dong~! That's the end of this round!! So here's the answer that you all have been waiting for ^_^





If some changes are not marked with a number, it's just a simple or obvious change that shouldn't need explanation. Feel free to question the answer key if you have any questions or doubts you wish to clarify.

I'm quite happy with the amount of participation we're receiving! Thank you guys and keep up the good work! I'll try to edit this post and give a few comments on each of your check in a chronological order.

Also, just a surprise but DittoCrow has done the best check for this paragraph! Congrats!! ^_^ Everyone did pretty good job too! :D Great job everyone!
Comments in a different color! I'll just do a quick highlight on where you've gone wrong and sometimes what you missed.



Furai iirc I told you the changes on IRC so I'm lazy to do it again for you u_u haha.

A word of advice to everyone. If you don't feel really confident with your checks, you can always proofread your own checks for a second time or more if you want! Personally, I always do that and sometimes I can dig out even more errors that I might have missed out. :) Good job everyone!! Let's see if there's an improvement in the second paragraph!

I think only one person decided to change this sentence to remove one of the two completely redundant parts. It's like saying "chandelure and heracross work well together and they are good parntners." At the very least you need to make it clear that one leads to the other.

Also, in my mind bulky ghosts is fine. Bulky waters makes no sense because there is no such thing as a water. Ghost-types, on the other hand, are... well, ghosts. It's logical enough, though perhaps it should be decapitalised.

Also the main problem with the first sentence is not really ambiguity but more repetition of "stats" and a lack of commas.

I don't feel the sentence is redundant. Pokemon can have great synergy, but not form an offensive core. The first clause introduces that the Pokemon work well together, while the second clause states in what way they work well together.

I would agree that additional information, such as which Pokemon leads to the other, could be added, but the purpose and place of the paragraph needs to be considered before content-based judgments can be established.