Due to some concerns raised regarding the quality and necessity of some new analyses, I'm implementing the following policies effective immediately.
1. Not every Pokemon is going to get a full revamp
We have a lot of quality analyses on-site, and for those Pokemon that don't need full revamps, we'd rather just touch up the ones on site to bring them in line with the new metagame. So how are we going to do that? Simple. QC is going to be doing a full sweep through all 151 Pokemon with OU analyses to decide which ones need revamps and which ones simply need minor updates. In order to accommodate this, B/W analyses will be closed for another 2 days. At the end of this 2-day period, we will have a new list of Pokemon that may be reserved for OU updates. Any Pokemon not getting a full revamp will have its existing analysis updated through SCMS and will be marked done.
2. It is imperative that all full revamps and new analyses be of the highest quality, and we will ensure that this happens
The first analyses of a new generation / metagame are incredibly important. In previous generations we've limited important update analyses to badged users, but I don't think that's necessary here. However, this means that we will be policing analyses to make sure that we are confident their owner is capable of doing these analyses justice. As a result, all revamps and new analyses will be under the utmost scrutiny, and we will not hesitate to reassign an analysis if it is deemed necessary. There are three main reasons this can happen:
1: Lack of knowledge or experience in the metagame.
For an analysis to be able to convey all the important information, it first has to contain all the important information. In order for this to happen, it needs an experienced and knowledgeable writer. Some writers are driven, but simply lack the experience to fully convey the nuance of a Pokemon. This is something that is acquired only through time and play, and cannot be rushed.
2: Failure to update in a timely manner.
These analyses are all extremely time-sensitive, and they need to be on-site soon in order to ensure that the on-site data is as up-to-date as possible. As a result, users who consistently fail to update their analyses in a timely manner run the risk of being reassigned simply to expedite the process.
3: Failure to acknowledge and accept QC decisions.
Quality Control exists for a reason. It is a panel of knowledgeable players who are in a unique position to ensure that all information on an analysis is accurate and effective. We put a lot of time and effort into learning the ins and outs of specific Pokemon so that their analyses can be as accurate and informative as possible. If multiple QC members are requesting a specified change, it's probably in your best interest to implement that change. Arguing with QC is a bad idea, and can result in having an analysis reassigned.
That's all, folks! See you in 2 days.
1. Not every Pokemon is going to get a full revamp
We have a lot of quality analyses on-site, and for those Pokemon that don't need full revamps, we'd rather just touch up the ones on site to bring them in line with the new metagame. So how are we going to do that? Simple. QC is going to be doing a full sweep through all 151 Pokemon with OU analyses to decide which ones need revamps and which ones simply need minor updates. In order to accommodate this, B/W analyses will be closed for another 2 days. At the end of this 2-day period, we will have a new list of Pokemon that may be reserved for OU updates. Any Pokemon not getting a full revamp will have its existing analysis updated through SCMS and will be marked done.
2. It is imperative that all full revamps and new analyses be of the highest quality, and we will ensure that this happens
The first analyses of a new generation / metagame are incredibly important. In previous generations we've limited important update analyses to badged users, but I don't think that's necessary here. However, this means that we will be policing analyses to make sure that we are confident their owner is capable of doing these analyses justice. As a result, all revamps and new analyses will be under the utmost scrutiny, and we will not hesitate to reassign an analysis if it is deemed necessary. There are three main reasons this can happen:
1: Lack of knowledge or experience in the metagame.
For an analysis to be able to convey all the important information, it first has to contain all the important information. In order for this to happen, it needs an experienced and knowledgeable writer. Some writers are driven, but simply lack the experience to fully convey the nuance of a Pokemon. This is something that is acquired only through time and play, and cannot be rushed.
2: Failure to update in a timely manner.
These analyses are all extremely time-sensitive, and they need to be on-site soon in order to ensure that the on-site data is as up-to-date as possible. As a result, users who consistently fail to update their analyses in a timely manner run the risk of being reassigned simply to expedite the process.
3: Failure to acknowledge and accept QC decisions.
Quality Control exists for a reason. It is a panel of knowledgeable players who are in a unique position to ensure that all information on an analysis is accurate and effective. We put a lot of time and effort into learning the ins and outs of specific Pokemon so that their analyses can be as accurate and informative as possible. If multiple QC members are requesting a specified change, it's probably in your best interest to implement that change. Arguing with QC is a bad idea, and can result in having an analysis reassigned.
That's all, folks! See you in 2 days.