Project: Concise (C&C) Full Discussion - Page 2

Dark Talon · Oct 6th, 2009, 6:16:17 PM

I'd like to volunteer to help with this. There are a lot of analyses that could be more concise, but we'd have to be extremely careful not to edit out any necessary information, since there is still a lot of important stuff hidden in them. We'd have to still go into detail, but omit things that aren't absolutely necessary.

**Theorymon** · Oct 6th, 2009, 6:37:25 PM

As mentioned before, I am already working on making Shaymin-S and Giratina-O shorter, so I would be happy to do any others once I get some more analyses done.

darkie · Oct 6th, 2009, 7:00:26 PM

I think simply writing more concise analyses and editing overly verbose works is the simplest and most effective solution.

Fireburn · Oct 6th, 2009, 7:22:42 PM

I can go back and try to make some of my analyses shorter. I have a question though, what if some analyses are already concise enough and don't really need shortening? Who would be the judge of that?

MetaNite · Oct 6th, 2009, 7:26:40 PM

The first thing we must do is decide which analysis are in need of shortening.

For instance, I don't think this analysis requires shortening:
http://www.smogon.com/dp/pokemon/zapdos

While I'd certainly say one such as this does:
http://www.smogon.com/dp/pokemon/giratina-o

While the above is well written, I highly doubt all this information is necessary.

EDIT: In my opinion, Fireburn's analysis are the appropriate length. A lot of information there, but not overdoing it.

Colonel M · Oct 6th, 2009, 9:56:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fat darkie

I think simply writing more concise analyses and editing overly verbose works is the simplest and most effective solution.

There is one issue that I have with this. Finding the people that will seriously re-write these.

Now maybe you, I, as well as many others, may not have major issues with this. There is, however, other Contributors that feel that it's simply better to just hack things out. Of course, the thing is the others feel like they don't want to waste what we have in front of us. I don't disagree with it, but I'll simply leave it up to the person editing the analysis on what they want to do.

In any case, yes I will be taking volunteers and yes I will be helping with these. Again, this project shouldn't start until we get C&C cleaned up, so I'm putting this project on hold until next week. Until then, those who've actually written analyses: do your best to shorten them.

Darkmalice · Oct 7th, 2009, 5:25:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fat Colonel M

Isn't that all that's necessary though? I mean, I can add some of the minor details like "This can check most Lucario and Scizor provided Heatran doesn't switch in" anyway. It's a rough draft that's willing to take suggestions.

It's probably up to personal opinion. I just thought some mention of Pokemon that Heatran can force out, as it's very good at it. But this a very minor issue.

Anyways I'll help out with this when we start the tabs. I prefer it to shortening analyses; it'll be easier and quicker than shortening the analyses. All we have to do is take the "core" from the set; just the few really important bits. Shortening analyses requires reading through it many times, seeing where grammatical changes can be made, and deciding how useful information is. Shortening the CM Giratina-O set description will take forever. Plus we wouldn't be removing that much when we rework analyses.

Xia · Oct 12th, 2009, 8:37:18 PM

To the mods (and more specifically, Colonel M):

1. Since this is an attempt to make analyses shorter, can abreviations (such as "SD" for Swords Dance) be used?

2. Is including the Opinion section in the concise analysis necessary? I typically see this section as something that could ultimately be skipped over unless I wanted to see how useful one person found a certain Pokemon.

diinbong · Oct 12th, 2009, 9:53:57 PM

1. I'm sure this is a "no". We're keeping content and quality, just cutting off unnecessary stuff.

2. The Opinion section isn't one person's opinion on a certain Pokemon. From my understanding, the opinion section is an explanation on how the Pokemon performs competitively. Whether this is how people write it in reality is a whole 'nother issue unfortunately.

bugmaniacbob · Oct 13th, 2009, 9:59:33 AM

So has a decision been reached about summary tabs and the like? I'm rather concerned about simply making the analyses as small as they can be.

Colonel M · Oct 13th, 2009, 10:01:50 AM

We're deciding to hold off on the summary tabs and see if we can make what we have as simplified, yet detailed, as possible. I'm going to ask someone about the Uber and OU tabs though.

MetaNite · Oct 13th, 2009, 4:40:07 PM

As of now, it just seems we are removing good information just to make the analyses more visually appealing. If people don't like reading a lot, who is holding a gun to their head making them read the whole thing ?_?

I certainly agree some analyses are way too long, such as Heatran, but others such as Infernape, Jirachi, and Metagross are not in my opinion.

Colonel M · Oct 13th, 2009, 5:59:13 PM

We're not trying to remove good information. Look at Infernape's first set. It looks pretty good. Same with the second set and the Choice Band | Specs. Aside from that, however, notice how much longer things get. I'm not trying to cut "good information". I'm trying to cut "redundant / unnecessary information".

Colonel M · Oct 13th, 2009, 7:50:29 PM

Alright, the overhaul. This will be for discussion of what we should concise / should not concise. Here you may post suggestions. At the moment I am not allowing any other randoms until people agree with it.

The current list is the following:

- Heatran
- Scizor
- Electivire
- Magnezone (some sets)
- Giratina
- Giratina-O
- Dialga's first set in general (not sure on the whole thing)
- Metagross
- Tentacruel (Toxic Spikes)
- Bronzong (Trick Room mostly, maybe Wall)
- Ninjask
- Empoleon (Lead)
- Blissey (WishBliss)
- Latias (OU Support and OU LO + 3 Attacks)
- Heracross
- Snorlax (CurseLax)
- Dragonite
- Infernape (Counters)
- Zapdos
- Gliscor (Physical Sweeper)
- Any Theorymon analyses (loljoke)

Feel free to add others, state reasons why. Also feel free to disagree to them.

Oct 6th, 2009, 7:00:26 PM	#28
darkie coolcoolcool Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 5,361 Plano, TX	I think simply writing more concise analyses and editing overly verbose works is the simplest and most effective solution. __________________

Oct 13th, 2009, 9:59:33 AM	#35
bugmaniacbob Fare thee well. Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 2,038 Floccinaucinihilipilification	So has a decision been reached about summary tabs and the like? I'm rather concerned about simply making the analyses as small as they can be. __________________ Art / C&C / The Smog / Longest Ever Analysis MkI / Longest Ever Analysis MkII / Warstories / Stupid Poem / CAP 4: Aurumoth

Oct 6th, 2009, 6:16:17 PM	#26
Dark Talon Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 121	I'd like to volunteer to help with this. There are a lot of analyses that could be more concise, but we'd have to be extremely careful not to edit out any necessary information, since there is still a lot of important stuff hidden in them. We'd have to still go into detail, but omit things that aren't absolutely necessary.

Oct 6th, 2009, 7:26:40 PM	#30
MetaNite Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 1,510 NJ-	The first thing we must do is decide which analysis are in need of shortening. For instance, I don't think this analysis requires shortening: http://www.smogon.com/dp/pokemon/zapdos While I'd certainly say one such as this does: http://www.smogon.com/dp/pokemon/giratina-o While the above is well written, I highly doubt all this information is necessary. EDIT: In my opinion, Fireburn's analysis are the appropriate length. A lot of information there, but not overdoing it.

Oct 12th, 2009, 8:37:18 PM	#33
Xia I am your big brother Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 2,464	To the mods (and more specifically, Colonel M): 1. Since this is an attempt to make analyses shorter, can abreviations (such as "SD" for Swords Dance) be used? 2. Is including the Opinion section in the concise analysis necessary? I typically see this section as something that could ultimately be skipped over unless I wanted to see how useful one person found a certain Pokemon.

Oct 12th, 2009, 9:53:57 PM	#34
diinbong ****************** Join Date: Oct 2008 Posts: 953	1. I'm sure this is a "no". We're keeping content and quality, just cutting off unnecessary stuff. 2. The Opinion section isn't one person's opinion on a certain Pokemon. From my understanding, the opinion section is an explanation on how the Pokemon performs competitively. Whether this is how people write it in reality is a whole 'nother issue unfortunately.

Oct 13th, 2009, 4:40:07 PM	#37
MetaNite Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 1,510 NJ-	As of now, it just seems we are removing good information just to make the analyses more visually appealing. If people don't like reading a lot, who is holding a gun to their head making them read the whole thing ?_? I certainly agree some analyses are way too long, such as Heatran, but others such as Infernape, Jirachi, and Metagross are not in my opinion.