Spelling and Grammar Standards

[Oglemi]

IMO if IVs were to be singular, the name would be IV not IVs; we call them Individual Values, not an Individual Value. I'm inclined to say let's continue to consider them plural.

 

[Dhaora]

Are either "paraflinching" or "para-flinching" terms we can use, or should we use "paralysis-flinching" (or something else entirely) when talking about the opportunity for paralysis to deny a turn?

 

[GatoDelFuego]

Paraflinching only I think

 

[Oglemi]

paraflinching yes

 

[LightningLuxray]

A weird question, but if a Pokemon isn't holding an item, what are we supposed to put? No Item? None? Nothing? N/A? Leave it blank?

 

[a fairy]

I'd imagine N/A or something similar (--?)

 

[horyzhnz]

I'd say that using 'None' is better than N/A, because N/A means not available, and it's not that an item is not available, it simply chooses not to hold one.

 

[Lord Alphose]

mmmm, not necessarily. N/A means not applicable, which actually does apply quite well to the situation at hand.

 

[Lumari]

Question about the whole 'crux' issue: from what I've read in the OP, this sentence has been outlawed for basically being fluff by nature. Therefore, when I was doing an amcheck yesterday that featured this sentence, I outright chopped the entire sentence out. However, I've also seen checks (don't recall if they were official) where the word 'crux' was simply replaced with a synonym, e.g. 'X is the most important move of this set'. I was wondering which way is correct. Imo the latter approach doesn't solve it; if 'X is the crux of the set' is considered fluff, then 'X is the most important move of the set' should be considered fluff as well, because the sentences state exactly the same thing, using (roughly) an equal amount of words. But yeah, if an official GP member could shed some light on this, that would be much appreciated ^_^

 

[Oglemi]

A weird question, but if a Pokemon isn't holding an item, what are we supposed to put? No Item? None? Nothing? N/A? Leave it blank?

Leave it blank, the SCMS doesn't recognize non-Item names and spits out an integrity error

 

[Oglemi]

Question about the whole 'crux' issue: from what I've read in the OP, this sentence has been outlawed for basically being fluff by nature. Therefore, when I was doing an amcheck yesterday that featured this sentence, I outright chopped the entire sentence out. However, I've also seen checks (don't recall if they were official) where the word 'crux' was simply replaced with a synonym, e.g. 'X is the most important move of this set'. I was wondering which way is correct. Imo the latter approach doesn't solve it; if 'X is the crux of the set' is considered fluff, then 'X is the most important move of the set' should be considered fluff as well, because the sentences state exactly the same thing, using (roughly) an equal amount of words. But yeah, if an official GP member could shed some light on this, that would be much appreciated ^_^

It's circumstantial; if it doesn't belong there at all just delete it, if it's used wrong but another word fit replace it. If it fits perfectly and doesn't seem forced you can leave it, but I'd rather you not.

 

[Muk]

When talking about a Pokemon's typing, always follow with a "-type" (Ghost-types, not Ghosts). The only exceptions are for "Dragons" and "Fairies".


I think "Ghosts" would be perfectly acceptable. I personally prefer "Ghost-types", but I don't see why exceptions should be made for "Dragons" and "Fairies" but not "Ghosts".

(I don't think "Bugs" should be acceptable though, lol)

 

[Oglemi]

My opinion on that one^

But for the most part these standards are hardline rules 9.9

 

[NoCheese]

I strongly advocate making the use of only one space after a period (i.e. a full stop) official policy. I've been going through many Pokedex entries on the SCMS to make small edits for things like clunky wording, capitalization, "-type", and removal of references to banned Pokemon, and have caught a couple outlier entries that used two spaces after every period.

 

[Sturdynips]

I strongly advocate making the use of only one space after a period (i.e. a full stop) official policy. I've been going through many Pokedex entries on the SCMS to make small edits for things like clunky wording, capitalization, "-type", and removal of references to banned Pokemon, and have caught a couple outlier entries that used two spaces after every period.

I've come across this in the SCMS too, though I don't think it's an issue as I'm pretty sure that the dex itself displays double spaces as just a single space.

 

[Muk]

IMO, "outprioritize" and "matchup" (as opposed to "match-up") should be added as coined terms.

 

[Oglemi]

Approve of the above

 

[GatoDelFuego]

I added both but can't really think of a good definition for "matchup". Somebody pls fix mine >:(

 

[Electrolyte]

I'd say it's "the current situation of the field mainly concerning the condition and capabilities of the active Pokemon of both players." Therefore, an advantageous / favorable matchup would be an advantageous / favorable situation, and a disadvantageous / unfavorable matchup would be a disadvantageous / unfavorable situation.

 

[Muk]

Can "sleep" be used as a verb to mean "to put to sleep"?

("If Darkrai has not already slept something, it can use Dark Void on Arceus.")

 

[GatoDelFuego]

Added. I think it sounds odd, but I've seen it used a bit before.

 

[Oglemi]

I really don't like using slept as a verb, I'd really we rather not on that one. "put something to sleep" is only two words more than "slept something," and it just hits the ear wrong while also being linguistically incorrect without needing to be

 

[GatoDelFuego]

 

[NoCheese]

I came across the phrase "Fairy + Ground coverage" while cleaning up Little Cup Snubbull's entry on the SCMS. This seems to hit a grey area. We use phrases like "Fairy / Ground typing" and "Fairy- and Ground-type attacks," but I couldn't find anything in this thread detailing the use of "+" in the context of attack types, rather than attack names. "Fairy- +" looks kind of awkward, which weighs against using "Fairy- + Ground-type coverage," so it seems to me that the plus should be replaced and we should just use the traditional "Fairy- and Ground-type coverage" instead. I didn't make this change in my SCMS submission, since I figured I should check here first.

 

[Oglemi]

I came across the phrase "Fairy + Ground coverage" while cleaning up Little Cup Snubbull's entry on the SCMS. This seems to hit a grey area. We use phrases like "Fairy / Ground typing" and "Fairy- and Ground-type attacks," but I couldn't find anything in this thread detailing the use of "+" in the context of attack types, rather than attack names. "Fairy- +" looks kind of awkward, which weighs against using "Fairy- + Ground-type coverage," so it seems to me that the plus should be replaced and we should just use the traditional "Fairy- and Ground-type coverage" instead. I didn't make this change in my SCMS submission, since I figured I should check here first.

You can use the phrase "Fairy + Ground coverage," the types don't always have to be subceded with -type suffix. So for example, "Steel is an awesome defensive typing, it resists Ice, Grass, Bug, etc. etc." without having to follow each one with - and ending with -type. I do both rather interchangeably in my analyses, it depends on the flow of the sentence and paragraph at the time as to when I decide which ones to use (I'll typically do my first entry with -type and then close following ones without).