WHO are DECK ARTICLES written for? [Archive]

Rogue Archetype

03/23/2011, 06:04 PM

Today, I decided to sit down with a bottle of water and just read . . .

I loaded up the "FEATURED ARTICLES" section of this site and read every front page article that has been posted over the past 6 months.

After doing this, a single question came to mind:

"Who is the target audience of these articles?"

"WHO gets the benefit of Front Page Deck Articles?"

In other words, who are deck articles intended to serve? Tournament players? New Players? People who are marginal and are looking for better options? Experienced league players who are researching options for their first tournaments? Parents? Kids? None of the above? All of the Above?

I began to become suspicious as to whether some articles were being written as a means to earn a little "net cred" or "net fame." That is, to establish one's self as being the AUTHORITY in running the deck that you have just "published." Maybe the perception is "if he put an article on the front page, he MUST be a great player!"

Maybe it's simpler than that. Perhaps, someone wants to just "patent" their deck idea by having it posted on the front page; they want to go down in history as the guy who introduced that deck to the format.

Maybe it's a combination of all of those speculations. :cool:

One thing that many of these articles had in common was their lack of detail.
Frankly, I've noticed that there is quite a bit of lazy writing (or lack thereof) in these articles.

I'm not, at all, disappointed with the articles. It's just... I can't determine if they really "help" anyone.

Look at the following card description:

Uxie. It sets up. You draw cards. Can also donk Unown Q. The End.

Hypothetically speaking:
If you're a new player, this doesn't even begin to express the benefits of using the card nor does it outline the manner in which the card is used. So, the new player still has no idea (and may even feel a tad inadequate because he doesn't already know what appears to be Common Knowledge) :frown:

If you're an old player, you get nothing from this. Actually, it's a waste of space to you because you already understand why the card is in there.

If you're a lurking parent looking for insight, you won't get any here.
- - - -
So, why is that description even written? Who does it even benefit ?

It appears that THE TARGET AUDIENCE is not considered in many of the articles that are featured.

This is NOT the fault of the site (as these same articles are posted on multiple sites). This is just a situation in which the paradigm is set up a certain way; people haven't been concerned with the wide range of possible readers when they write their articles. As a result, they are ineffective when used as learning tools.

Here's another exerpt from a front page article:

I originally played 4, but at that point I had 20 Supporters. Such a great card, just simply a staple. Period.

Again, who does this information benefit?

If you're a new player, you have NO IDEA what's going on here. You don't know WHY it's "a great card," you don't know what's up with "staples" and you're now asking yourself about the number of supporters that should be played in decks. :cool:

If you're an experienced player, this information does absoltuely nothing for you.

If you're a lurking parent looking for insight, you won't get any here.

How do you make your writing more USEFUL ?

You just take the time to EXPLAIN the WHY/HOW/WHAT !

There were some gems among the sea of articles if you care to dig deep enough.

Contrast this simple description of why someone uses BeBe's Search

Bebe Search. It gets me Pokemon I need.

With this FUNCTIONAL and specific example:

BeBe Search - This is used primarily to get out Uxie Lv. X to start the Trade Off draw engine, or Mismagius to provide a Mewtwo counter. Bebe’s Search can also grab you a Palkia G Lv. X or Garchomp C Lv. X under a Spiritomb lock. Also, the card that you put back into the deck with Bebe’s Search allows you to draw more with Uxie’s Set Up.

Nekizalb takes things a step further in his example and explains WHAT he needs that card to search for! He gives specific uses for the card which gives the reader a very meaningful insight into the mechanics of his deck. What if ALL cards in a deck article were written with this sort of specificity?

I won't go any further into this rant.

I just want to discuss the concept of DECK ARTICLE and WHO they are REALLY supposed to target.
If I had to assume, I would think that they are supposed to be written for tournament players who are wondering WHY a certain deck is running through a format. There may be another school of thought that would propose that deck articles should be written for NEW/MARGINAL players to get a shortcut to up their ... playing significance (for lack of a better word).

What do you think?

AGAIN... I'm not trying to hate on front page articles. So, do not take the discussion there.

THE POINT is to discuss WHO they are supposed to be written for as that is not very clear at the present.

Hatter™

03/23/2011, 06:14 PM

I feel that is has always been that Pokebeach is for "New" players and Pokegym is for the players who want to go a step further once they comprehend the basics of the game. People wouldn't explain what they do because they just figure people KNOW their purpose in decks.
Also, some people probably just figure since basically every deck has an outline of "Staples" such as Pokemon Collector, Bebe's Search, Luxury Ball, etc. that there is no need to go in depth on them.

EDIT: Also, the only reason an article should be written is probably for archetypes or super fun decks. If you write about a deck that you like a lot [Take my "Worm Lock" article], post people won't care, and, now that I look back, I shouldn't of written about it because it has no relevance.

waynegg

03/23/2011, 06:21 PM

This is NOT the fault of the site (as these same articles are posted on multiple sites).

I thought that one of the rules for an article to be printed was that it had to be exclusive to the gym.

I would hope that articles are published in an effort to explain the mechanics of a good deck with a thorough explanation of what each card brings to the deck and why it's in there over other choices. Seeing some of the quotes you posted, kinda makes one wonder.

now that I look back, I shouldn't of written about it because it has no relevance.

Nah, you should have. It was an interesting read and even if the deck itself wasn't so big I'm sure it gave people other ideas and ways out of issues their deck was having. Because you took the time to explain interactions and the whys and hows.

The Gorn

03/23/2011, 06:28 PM

Matt Moss' ZRE article is the yardstick by which all deck articles are measured.

And while there have been some good articles, none have yet measured up.

Jason

03/23/2011, 06:56 PM

uuuufff's Gyarados article is one of the best I seen here in a year. That should be a sick example to go for. Especially the matchups section.

Porii Sames

03/23/2011, 08:10 PM

I knew mine wasn't the best, but in it, I tried to make the descriptions of the cards at least good enough that a younger player would understand...

uuufff's was great tho.

Regis_Neo

03/23/2011, 08:45 PM

Why people would bother writing articles for "e-fame" I'll never understand...

But I dunno, I usually assume whoever writes articles on here would write for the general public at large who visit this site, as this site encompasses so many different people (players, parents, etc etc), unless you're specifying a certain audience, I would guess you'd want the article to be as easy to understand as possible for everyone. Most of them also tend to assume their audience at least has a general grasp of the current trends too, which could use some work in that regard.

chrataxe

03/23/2011, 09:10 PM

Why people would bother writing articles for "e-fame" I'll never understand...

Coming from the only person on the gym that quoted himself...

TheKing

03/23/2011, 09:22 PM

^ Not the only one

http://pokegym.net/forums/member.php?u=31411

yoyofsho16

03/23/2011, 09:45 PM

I don't think the target audience matters... it's just a wealth of information. It's for everyone. If the deck is thoroughly explained and broken down enough, anyone can learn from it.

If an article doesn't have mass appeal, I feel it's not a good article. This is why more top players should write... they tell things as they are, what they've statistically seen, and don't make conjecture or inference.

Prime

03/24/2011, 07:33 AM

I think R_A nailed that a lot of these articles are being written BY experienced players FOR experienced players. The reason? That can be debated.

I'm just wondering...who is writing articles FOR new players? The demographic that really needs the articles more than any other group?

Seems like everyone rushes and pushes in line to write the first article based on the popular deck, but when it comes to explaining why Jumpluff is so brilliant and a good choice for new players, the room is silent.

One person says that PokeBeach is for new players, PokeGym is for experienced. Why can't both sites appeal to both demographics? Honestly, I thought all the "l33t" players weren't even visiting the site anymore because of how 'n00b' the members are.

Just some thoughts...

sibon72

03/24/2011, 10:08 AM

^ Not the only one

http://pokegym.net/forums/member.php?u=31411

Yay! I have E-fame!!!

On-topic:

I think anyone who happens to enjoy reading them is the target audience, so an article that is well written, has useful info and discussion value will have a wider target audience (more people enjoy it) and it will be more successful.

Cyrus

03/24/2011, 10:13 AM

Very interesting point, R_A. I think all websites have something to learn from what you just said.

Just keep in mind that it _is_ the Gym's fault for letting this sort of thing slide: you have the right to refuse.

baby mario

03/24/2011, 11:00 AM

Pretty much all of what RA says is true.

But none of it is the fault of the people who are writing the articles.

The PokeGym (owners, article editors, mods) need to have a clear policy on stuff like this. Should articles be accessible for new players, should they only feature proven lists, should the writers have a track record with the deck? I know there used to be guidelines for that stuff but recently it seems that whoever decides what should go on the front page has been far too nice and has failed to say 'no' (or insist on massive changes) to some pretty shoddy articles.

The Gym needs to decide exactly what it wants, post that information, and then stick to its own guidelines.

The Submission Guidelines (http://pokegym.net/forums/showthread.php?t=13625) that I found were last updated in 2005.

Time for some new ones?

espeon200

03/24/2011, 11:04 AM

I think a bigger question here is what is who is the target audience that The Gym wants to appeal to with the articles? By placing them on the front page, the mods of The Gym are saying, "This is what we think our users think will be most interesting." Does the gym want to solely target Advanced players who are already making their Worlds plans and want to see what other ideas world-calibur players are doing? Or doe The Gym want to target new players/pokeparents that want to read about what the best decks in the format are so that they can try to learn what makes them so good. In either case, I agree with A_R that the examples he cites help neither group.

I will say that when I first started coming back to the gym after an incredibly long hiatus from the game, I didn't read these articles because I was more interested in the discussion topics and official rulings in the main forum. In fact, I still don't generally make a habit of reading the articles that are posted to the main page, unless they're news articles, because I feel I already get the same level or better of strategy info from other sites that I visit.

Regis_Neo

03/25/2011, 12:45 AM

Coming from the only person on the gym that quoted himself...

Ah but there's the funny thing...I actually never posted that quote anywhere, I made it up and just threw it in quotes because just posting it in regular text would have pushed it over the line limit, whereas a quote not only makes it more noticeable and neater, but fits everything in the line limit :thumb:

PokeDad

03/25/2011, 03:18 PM

When top decks are written about by top players, when the mechanics of those decks are explained, it helps educate and elevate our younger less experienced players - and it offers the opportunity for the games most avid players to explain the game to us old pokeparents who judge more than we play. I find the articles useful, and I get to know the posters better through the writing style they put forward.

The kids and us really old folks sure appreciate the articles. Keep 'em coming.

MrMeches

03/25/2011, 07:54 PM

Well R_A, as the former Editor.... let me focus on a specific line you used that I can't help but take offense too:

I'm not, at all, disappointed with the articles. It's just... I can't determine if they really "help" anyone.

I know many of my newer players that got directed to the Gym mentioned how helpful the variations of Engines and fundamentals were. Also, some players did not understand the concept of SP, so these definitely assisted.

The thought process I always used was 'What makes this article different than an existing one, here.. on other sites..and what, if any, as an Experienced player and 'New' Player would I be able to use.'

Sometimes the pure terminology is helpful to players from different areas. Slang and abbreviations also provide direction... from PONT to Turn to Qing... these terms have provided insight to understanding brief in game statements.

It is an opinion there have been solid How To Articles and also Fun Upbeat League articles. The FP is about giving a brief glimpse of around the WORLD in POKEMON. Things people are having FUN with and tried and proven Deck Articles. Information for upcoming Events and New Rulings coming into effect for the next BIG event.

Articles are critical to hit ALL AUDIENCES in some form... good or bad... to provide a discussion of thegoings on in POKEMON!

Prime

03/26/2011, 08:23 AM

I'm not sure why so many attribute the blame to the PokeGym staff, for 2 reasons:

1) R_A is pointing at EVERY POKEMON WEB SITE. Not just PokeGym. That means the same for SixPrizes, Pojo, PokeBeach, etc, etc. This isn't just a PokeGym problem, it's a POKEMON problem.

2) People assume that the PokeGym can raise their standards and still receive the same # of submissions. I think it's pretty obvious that the PokeGym doesn't consistently have a solid # of submissions throughout the year. I feel quite confident that if the PokeGym were to place more restrictions on submitted articles, there would be less articles submitted.

People always blame the PokeGym; always saying that they should only allow actual experienced decks to be written about, only allow people with tournament success to write them, and now, that more rules and guidelines need to be added so to make the articles better.

So, everyone is saying that the PokeGym should become the writer, publisher, and editor-in-chief?

Why can't we put a little pressure on the writers to step up their game, or for talented writers to actually write something?

I may sound pro-PokeGym in many of my replies, but that is because the PokeGym is a lot like the government, in that people blame it for all of the problems, when people aren't really trying to do their part in their area to help fix the problem. In the long run, the millions of people not doing their part to help fix the problem hurts the situation more than whatever is happening in the government (PokeGym).

Happiny13

03/26/2011, 10:36 AM

I agree RA. I feel an article has to have a lot of detail to be helpful. As a new player and even now, articles never interested me if I couldn't learn a lot from it. Articles that I really enjoyed were Jumpluff by Fulop and Speedgar by jjkl. Those 2 articles really impacted me, and I actually picked those decks up. Shorter articles with less detail have basically no impact in my opinion.

jjkkl

03/26/2011, 12:57 PM

I went 3-1 at states before dropping out, taking down 1 luxchomp, 1 something-gar, and 1 (pretty bad) Donphan Prime deck in the process with a joke deck. Should I write about that? Obviously not.

Do I still do it anyways (http://pokegym.net/forums/showthread.php?t=141326)? Of course.

The thing is there's no consistency in the deck formats, and there's too much left up to the subjectivity of the people who are supposedly filtering out the minor problems in the deck submissions section. A couple people thought that me mentioning 'this is a fun deck' was more important and more prescient to point out in my Winrar Starforce article than the fact that Core Flash hits powers and bodies, and now I can't change it without pissing somebody off since I'm not supposed to change it. WAT

If you have a more stringent guideline of things that have to be followed, not this incessant toe-stepping we're seeing, then we'll get better articles, period. 'But jjkkl', you may posit, in the most nonsensical and pretentious tone, 'don't we do that now? What if it doesn't work?'

It will work, and no, we haven't been doing it. I don't see the same consistency between something like this:

http://pokegym.net/forums/showthread.php?t=140625 (don't overinflate your ego now)

compared to something like this:

http://pokegym.net/forums/showthread.php?t=118689 (no offense, but seriously, what?)

You want to have articles that are worth something? Install a set of minimums - quantifiable, higher, quality-focused minimums (hint: having writers bold words and hyperlink images isn't a minimum, it's like asking an essayist to put note his sources and cite his works - it's just common sense) - and enforce them. None of this 'per article reviewer differs' garbage. You have a dedicated group to sit down, read it, and then mark it. If it doesn't work, then it doesn't work, and tell them that, and tell them why.

Heck, use a checklist if you have to, don't rely on 'gut' instincts, because that's exactly what I'm seeing right now. I'm not saying write only on supar srs dekkz or about asinine subjects about Champion Chad here won a billion battle roads and thus should be idolised, no - I'm saying if someone submits an article, then they need to follow the guidelines you put down, and if they don't, then you either tell them to re-submit it or you give them the door. None of the 'please put your name on here' stuff. No, you need to make them aggregate, like:

Name:
Date Submitted:
Date Published:
Relevant Format:
Writer's Metagame:

Stuff like that. Make them follow everything - the format, the information - to the dot. Do you seriously think if in a newspaper Betty Whatsherface wants to put gold borders and banners on her article, they'll let her? If someone has a good idea and wants to add something, sure. Note the word 'add', not change. Add. Making a rainbow title or adding in a billion pictures for techs isn't adding something - it's changing something, and for the worst. So set these standards, make it stringent, and enforce them for once.

Only then can the gym's articles move from being a singularity of mediocrity and into something quality.

MrMeches

03/26/2011, 01:22 PM

Rogue Archetype

03/26/2011, 04:27 PM

Well R_A, as the former Editor.... let me focus on a specific line you used that I can't help but take offense too:

Then... you read it out of context.

There's no way you can be offended by that if you read what comes before and after it. :cool:

FOR THE REST OF YOU ....

O.K. People. You can't run in here and say "YOU ALL NEED TO JUST MAKE GUIDELINES AND STUFF!" and call yourself an intellectual. You haven't even scratched the surface of the issue with comments that allude to that.

The MINDSET of the writer is what's in question here.

Frankly, I question how many of these people who write the articles are concerned with actually providing insight and employ a willingness to truly give the reader a thorough understanding of how to use the deck.

I wasn't trying to really "go there," but it gets a little annoying when people derail the intentions of what I've posted with a "y'all need to do ya darn jobs then!" type of post. It's not about that. It's about the people approaching their writings with a willingness to do THEIR jobs!

In audio mastering, we have an old saying "Garbage in, Garbage out."
When someone submits poorly recorded music, we could only process it so much and make it not-as-bad. When someone submits a clean mix, then the possibilities were endless. We could expand the stereo range, balance a variety of frequences, warm up the overall sound, and even make the track hot without peaking out limits.

Anyway, if you get a slew of articles that use the same approach (because they've probably just copycated the others), then you can't REWRITE it. You simply choose the best of the evils and "send it to press."

In other words, you can only edit and suggest based on WHAT YOU"RE GIVEN!

If NOONE really cares to take the time to walk the reader through the deck's strategy and mechanics, then you take the article that, at least, has some good structure and is easy to read.

My question remains: WHO ARE THESE ARTICLES FOR?

What do websites (ANY of them) attempt to accomplish with front page deck articles?

When you look at a magazine cover, you see a headline that is "breaking news" about a person or a topic. You read further with an expectation of getting "the scoop" on the topic. That is, you READ FOR DETAILS THAT MAY BE ENLIGHTENING.

Specificity is a beautiful thing. A lack thereof, however, can be a waste of everyone's time.

Please go back and re-read my original post. I think I said what I intended to say up there.
There's no need for anybody to view it as "toe-stepping" or offensive. It's just an observation that I put up for discussion.

It is my hope that someone tries to take the "sit here and let me explain this deck to you so you can play it" approach.

BUT.. maybe it shouldn't have that approach at all! That's what I don't know. Maybe I have it twisted?

Hence, the discussion and the absence of accusation... :thumb:

baby mario

03/26/2011, 04:53 PM

But RA, does it really matter WHY someone writes an article?

If someone produces a great article, giving experienced players great tips and beginners solid insights into what makes a good list, does it even matter if they wrote it for e-fame?

If someone writes with the very best intentions to help out younger/new players but ends up writing a shoddy article full of errors that shows a poor understanding of the metagame, then they may well be hurting the people they are trying to help.

THAT's why the Gym needs updated guidelines and minimum standards imo. It's the best way of making sure that beneficial articles get on the front page, regardless of the motives of the writers.

It's like with your music analogy. Isn't it better to TELL people to give you a clean mix, instead of just sitting there and hoping they work it out for themselves?

Rogue Archetype

03/26/2011, 05:03 PM

Yep. I'm gonna get some sleep and think more betterer :P

Great point though BM

Prime

03/26/2011, 06:46 PM

But RA, does it really matter WHY someone writes an article?

YES..... :P okay, for an actual response.

If someone produces a great article, giving experienced players great tips and beginners solid insights into what makes a good list, does it even matter if they wrote it for e-fame?

I think the logic here is that anyone writing an article for the 'e-fame' of it, won't bring those qualities to the article.

And that logic makes sense.

While we are on the topic of music, I'll use an analogy. When I think of a music artist that (in my opinion) is only doing it for the fame, I think of Kei$ha. I feel like her songs are just sloppy and she relies too heavily on auto-tuning to match a tone.

In her case, she may have some hits, but her hits will NEVER have as much impact or be as meaningful as a hit from an artist that is really giving it their all. You may argue that Kei$ha's song are making her money, that she (may be) earning awards, but that doesn't mean her songs are good. It just means people like it.

Just because people like some articles, doesn't mean the articles serve a purpose.

I think R_A hit it on the head again when he said:

Frankly, I question how many of these people who write the articles are concerned with actually providing insight and employ a willingness to truly give the reader a thorough understanding of how to use the deck.I feel most writers assume a higher level of experience from their readers, thus, much like in the examples R_A gave in his opening post, they spend very little time explaining, 'the obvious' (uxie, bebe, other staples).

I'm not saying the majority of those on the 'Gym don't understand the articles, I'm just saying that many writers don't go to long lengths to make sure their articles are understandable to any level of player.

The 'l33t' writing for the 'l33t'.

If someone writes with the very best intentions to help out younger/new players but ends up writing a shoddy article full of errors that shows a poor understanding of the metagame, then they may well be hurting the people they are trying to help.

Shoddy article, regardless of intentions, is not going to be published.

But I do think you're looking it from only 2 shades. It's not either the deck article is great or it is shoddy, there are a ton of grays and plenty of different scenarios.

There's a very good chance that someone with the very best intentions is going to write a very good article. Usually, it's the people with those intentions that do the better job, because they are willing to spend the extra time. Guy over there that just wants the 'e-fame' for the article isn't going to spend as much time writing it. He just wants his name next to the article so he can gloat to his friends.

It's like with your music analogy. Isn't it better to TELL people to give you a clean mix, instead of just sitting there and hoping they work it out for themselves?

You can tell people whatever you want. They are still going to give you rough mixes, or shoddy articles. Piling on restrictions and guidelines are just going to turn people away from even starting down the process of creating something.

You go to the pool each summer. One year, you notice they've added a new Rules board on the fence near the pool. On the board, it says:

No running
No skipping
No briskly walking
No eating while in the pool
No talking while in the pool
No tossing around toys while in the pool
No jeans allowed in the pool
No non-swimming shorts allowed in the pool
No plastic-coated swimming shorts allowed in the pool
No red colored clothing allowed in the pool
No loose shirts allowed in the pool

You wonder why they've added all these new restrictions, and the pool guard tells you:

"It's because we're trying to preserve the quality of swimming at our pool."

:/

MrMeches

03/26/2011, 09:24 PM

Let me add as well, many articles are provided with Bones to work from. An editor can only provide so much before it becomes the editor's Article. Additionally, the creative process is difficult to grasp. That is why some use ghost writers.

The main suggestion I gave everyone was to have someone else read it and get opinions then submit the article. Most of the Great Articles in the past few years have been collaborative efforts. These Articles are 5 star articles and have been staples for many to reference.

Also, I have always directed writers to certain articles already there for direction. The problem I see is too many have come to the thought process of 'well, the reader should already know this' and not take the responsibility of 'the writer should explain themselves more clearly'. This very comment halted a lot of submissions from lack of response.

I will agree that many articles all around seem to be geared more towards let's throw it up quick mentality to be NEW instead of let's develop this a bit more.

Bottom line... you can only work with what is submitted... which for many sites is very little. It is unfortunate, but many feel that if they write articles, they will give away their secrets. I solicited many top tier players and asked for a skeleton list or even just a strategy article with no list, and in the year plus, I got 3.

It really does come back to the fact that many feel they are better than the game and not realize they are actually a PART of the game. You may be better at the end of the day with a winning record, but it was the testing and suggestions from your friends and competitors that got you to that point. This is something other people feel is why they do not HAVE to give back, because THEY did the work and why should "I" share my success. It is unfortunate, but it is reality. Trade secrets I can understand, but providing some solid general knowledge helps the game evolve!

baby mario

03/27/2011, 12:19 AM

YES..... :P okay, for an actual response.

I think the logic here is that anyone writing an article for the 'e-fame' of it, won't bring those qualities to the article.

And that logic makes sense.

Not necessarily.

Someone who wants the e-fame is arguably FORCED to write at least decently. Not much cred in writing something that gets demoted to DH&S after being crucified on the front page is there?

It can be argued both ways.

While we are on the topic of music, I'll use an analogy. When I think of a music artist that (in my opinion) is only doing it for the fame, I think of Kei$ha. I feel like her songs are just sloppy and she relies too heavily on auto-tuning to match a tone.

In her case, she may have some hits, but her hits will NEVER have as much impact or be as meaningful as a hit from an artist that is really giving it their all. You may argue that Kei$ha's song are making her money, that she (may be) earning awards, but that doesn't mean her songs are good. It just means people like it.

Depends how you measure 'impact'. I'm not a fan of KeiSha, but isn't her impact on the world greater than some guy giving his all for music, producing stuff that no-one wants to hear?

Just because people like some articles, doesn't mean the articles serve a purpose.

They entertain and give enjoyment to the people who like them. That's a purpose, no?

I think R_A hit it on the head again when he said:

I feel most writers assume a higher level of experience from their readers, thus, much like in the examples R_A gave in his opening post, they spend very little time explaining, 'the obvious' (uxie, bebe, other staples).

I'm not saying the majority of those on the 'Gym don't understand the articles, I'm just saying that many writers don't go to long lengths to make sure their articles are understandable to any level of player.

The 'l33t' writing for the 'l33t'.

This is probably true. Would guidelines help with this?

Shoddy article, regardless of intentions, is not going to be published.

I won't give examples because I don't want to be mean, but imo, that is not true.

But I do think you're looking it from only 2 shades. It's not either the deck article is great or it is shoddy, there are a ton of grays and plenty of different scenarios.

I know, I was making the point that it is the outcome, not the intentions that matter.

You can tell people whatever you want. They are still going to give you rough mixes, or shoddy articles. Piling on restrictions and guidelines are just going to turn people away from even starting down the process of creating something.

You go to the pool each summer. One year, you notice they've added a new Rules board on the fence near the pool. On the board, it says:

No running
No skipping
No briskly walking
No eating while in the pool
No talking while in the pool
No tossing around toys while in the pool
No jeans allowed in the pool
No non-swimming shorts allowed in the pool
No plastic-coated swimming shorts allowed in the pool
No red colored clothing allowed in the pool
No loose shirts allowed in the pool

You wonder why they've added all these new restrictions, and the pool guard tells you:

"It's because we're trying to preserve the quality of swimming at our pool."

:/

Honestly don't see the point here. Not talking about guidelines for superficial stuff like 'red-coloured clothing'. No-one is saying you should have guidelines that say 'no red text' are they? Do you really believe that you can't have submission guidelines without a bunch of picky, stupid restrictions?

Turn it around.

What's wrong with a swimming pool that has a notice saying 'no glass objects', 'no nudity', 'no fighting', 'no pissing in the pool' etc?

Rogue Archetype

03/27/2011, 05:35 AM

bullados

03/27/2011, 02:17 PM

I'll agree with Fish, and add a little bit from my short stint on the Front Page...

Article submissions didn't come in very often, maybe one or two a week. Unfortunately, the quality of the articles varied greatly, and almost no article was Front Page worthy on the first pass through. Some times, though, I would go a couple of months without having something go up front, so I'd have to take something that IMO wasn't quite up to standard and move it forward just to make sure that something up there gets updated.

I'd comment on almost every article that I got through, noting parts where the rules on the card interactions weren't quite right and correcting spelling and grammar as much as possible. I always suggested ways that the article could be improved. Not every author would listen. Not only that, but the back-end made it difficult-to-impossible to see with a glance which articles have been edited and when the edits happened.

The truly great articles that I posted had extremely patient authors with humility and were willing to let their articles get broken down, beat up, and rebuilt again so that they included the best information possible. I always cite the Torterra/Sceptile (http://pokegym.net/forums/showthread.php?t=93886&highlight=Torterra) article as a kind of golden standard at least in part because of the lengthy and incredibly productive editing session that one went through.

I always tried to keep an eye out for the newer or younger player when editing an article. Where shorthand or colloquial language appeared (such as TecH), I asked the authors to define the terms in the article, even if it was just a short blurb. I liked long paragraphs, even though I know they're not particularly internet-friendly, because they gave a ton of information. I was always telling the authors to think of alternate support cards to the ones suggested in the deck and explain why those weren't needed. In the Torterra article listed above, there's a pretty extensive discussion about the strengths and weaknesses of each Torterra line card, and it's pretty well discussed why each of the cards was chosen.

The biggest thing, IMO, is that, in general, authors for this site don't like to be edited. They believe that their initial draft (or the first one that sees the Gym) is plenty sufficient for the purposes of this site. There were plenty of times where I'd comment on an article and the author simply wouldn't respond or change anything. Or where they'd change something and (strangely) make the entire article worse. I'll admit that, at times, my advice could have been a little obtuse or poorly worded. But there were plenty of times when stuff just didn't get changed, and good (but not great) articles ended up wasting away because of rulings mistakes or general shallowness of the article.

Prime

03/27/2011, 03:12 PM

Depends how you measure 'impact'. I'm not a fan of KeiSha, but isn't her impact on the world greater than some guy giving his all for music, producing stuff that no-one wants to hear?

I'd argue this because of some famous people that became famous on sites like YouTube. Like the group, "Auto-Tune the News". I am 100% confident that they will make or am making a larger impact on the world than Kei$ha.

Again, why do you use the example of someone 'giving his all' but making something 'no-one wants'? You keep falling back to black or white. Regardless of the purpose of the content, if the content is poor, nobody will care. But those who really put their all into something will should always make a bigger impact.

I won't give examples because I don't want to be mean, but imo, that is not true.

Again, shades of gray. Don't you think there were some articles that were never published? Perhaps the articles you think of as "shody" are better than some of the other articles that didn't 'see play'.

Honestly don't see the point here. Not talking about guidelines for superficial stuff like 'red-coloured clothing'. No-one is saying you should have guidelines that say 'no red text' are they? Do you really believe that you can't have submission guidelines without a bunch of picky, stupid restrictions?

Then do it. Come up with a rough draft of guidelines. You're making it sound like it's really easy. You've read enough of the articles, jot down some guidelines.

nnaann

03/31/2011, 04:19 PM

Previous post.

I don't understand why any constructive criticism is taken with offence, and a 'well you do better' attitude. Everyone knows that a lot of articles aren't up to scratch, and that the whole process with them needs reviewing.

I agree with Baby Mario that the guidelines need reviewing, but it's not our job to make sure that the correct ones are in place. I don't think you realise how valuable the feedback is that you're getting from members here, stopping them from posting their opinions in the future isn't going to help.

Benzo

03/31/2011, 04:57 PM

Keep in mind that personality is one thing that gives an article some feel of ownership to the words they type. Taking the time to type up an article, even if your not a pro will still be at the mercy of a critic.
It is one thing to type up an article about one's personal experiance on something, and another to type up an article for others to SEE what your saying without personality getting in the way.

People type how they speak, and type what they understand regardless of someone else interpretation.
Thats where an issue is when it comes to submitted articles.

Updated guidlines, a minimum level of proffesionalism in the typing/word requirment- maybe having a mod who does take the time to do some one/one to assist the person submitting the article to "clean it up".

Sure, have a rule that say's "no running" and your sure to find a person who says " I was speed walking"......

Prime

03/31/2011, 07:03 PM

Updated guidlines, a minimum level of proffesionalism in the typing/word requirment- maybe having a mod who does take the time to do some one/one to assist the person submitting the article to "clean it up".

You know that's a big slap in the face of the previous mods who were article front page editors (like Bullados and Da'Fish).

These people DID do one-on-one's with the writers to try to improve the articles. They did a lot more than that, although none of it ever gets any attention or the praise it deserves. It's always 'needing work' and should always be done 'by someone else who can get the job done'.

That's why I always say, "do it yourself," because it never seems like enough for the members who don't have to do anything but click on a link and start reading.

:nonono:

vanderbilt_grad

03/31/2011, 07:20 PM

Then... you read it out of context.

There's no way you can be offended by that if you read what comes before and after it. :cool:

You know, if you had said something offended me and then you said this back to me ... well I would just be more offended RA.

On your OT back when I wrote my Duskonir/Giscor FP bit three years ago (amazing that the deck is still mostly in format) I was asked to do major edits so many times that I almost gave up. Nearly all the edits were aimed at making it more friendly towards new players. It was super painful to explain everything in full detail ... so much so that it really killed my desire to write for the Gym for a long time.

I know that editing is different now. However I consider what happened to me to be a risk if you really start trying to make things new-player accessable. You will see fewer FP submissions.

My honest opinion is that things aren't bad now. I like the way FP stuff happens better today than I did 3 years ago.

Benzo

03/31/2011, 07:47 PM

@prime: See how simple it is to critisize or misunderstand what someone says? Maybe having a different aproach in responding to my post with a question as to get a better clarification as too what I am saying.

To better clarify what I said: Maybe ("maybe" is a tricky word, which is easy for anyone to misunderstand it's use ) having a mod who works one/one with article submiters can make for better quality written articles. I should have also included a question after saying that, so I will add that in now: IS there a resource like that here on the 'gym for people to get this kind of help?

Taking it at face value on your statement of "none of it ever gets any attention or the praise it deserves"- Every day at work, does your boss thank and praise you for what you do? EVERY day?

Prolly not- ( unless your self employeed).

My statement was a suggestion, not a slap in the face, and, like when a person submits an article- it might not be some worthy of being printed on the cover of a major city newspaper, but it is a contribution from a member who ( for what ever the reason ) feels/wants to be a part of something. If people notice the level of quality deminishing on a site, they speak up. But those who speak up need to understand that the site is offering to many, and not focusing on the few.

Jaeger

03/31/2011, 08:24 PM

The reason we don't get high quality articles is because there is no incentive for good players to write articles, I'm sorry but we all know its true. I am 38-5 with Luxchomp this season and I would like to think I have a pretty good grasp of the deck, how to play it, and the meta. So why I not writing an article? Because it would be a lot of time and effort when I don't gain anything by it. I know it sounds cold but I have spent alot of time and effort testing the deck all season, talking with other top players, and find a list I like. I don't feel like I should give away the fruits of all my hard work for free expecially when it will put me at a disadvantage. This is why you get a bunch of average players who are looking for Internet Fame writing articles.

For Example
Pokegym has an article from a guy who copied Con's Sablock deck (refused to give him credit) and than wrote a subpar article on it. But Con wasn't going to gain anything by writing an article so we settled.
SixP: has an article by a guy who read the report of the guy who got 2nd at the European Cup and than tried to decifer his list by pulling details from the report.
We all know their is a lot more examples I won't go on though.

EeveeLover

04/01/2011, 12:35 AM

To better clarify what I said: Maybe ("maybe" is a tricky word, which is easy for anyone to misunderstand it's use ) having a mod who works one/one with article submiters can make for better quality written articles. I should have also included a question after saying that, so I will add that in now: IS there a resource like that here on the 'gym for people to get this kind of help?

Actually, every article that is submitted is reviewed by at least one Staff member, if not 2 or 3.

Articles that are submitted do not just get tossed to the FP without any review. Even if there are cases that seems to be what happened.

Bullados, Da' Fish, Lucario EX, Pokepop, myself, and others from long ago have always worked with the writer to get the best possible articles out on the FP.

While, at times, we have missed the mark, for the most part the articles have been well written and a good example of the wirters desire to put their deck out there for all to see.

Would we (the Gym) love to see more articles written by the World Champs, National Champs and other Top Tier players? Heck yes, we would, but as it was pointed out - there is nothing in it for them. We don't pay for articles, we also don't charge for the site. The income that comes in from the ads pay for the server and software. Nothing more.

I know this will ruffle some feathers, but if members aren't willing to contribute, they really don't have much right to complain about the end result.

Jaeger

04/01/2011, 07:14 AM

I know this will ruffle some feathers, but if members aren't willing to contribute, they really don't have much right to complain about the end result.

I'll agree with to be honest, but on the same note if Pokegym isn't will to be more selective on the articles that go up than they shouldn't claim the front page articles are anything more than the deck help section with a few lines of text.

bullados

04/01/2011, 09:16 AM

Jay, I don't know how it works now, but when I was working the Front Page, I liked to have the articles permeate for at least a week, if not two, with multiple rewrite sessions until I felt that they contained the most complete and correct information that they possibly could. Again, that Torterra article I referenced in my earlier post probably went through a month of rewrites and additions to become as fantastic of an article as it became.

That being said, sometimes stuff seeps through the cracks. I'm not perfect, nor would I guess is any other FPE that the Gym has ever had. I did let a couple of articles slip through that I wish I could have had back. My only excuse for those articles was that I had to juggle work, school, and my local leagues (amongst other things) as well as my FPE duties, and it can wear a little bit.

As far as Vandy's post, I completely own up to that. I was trying to create a Front Page section that was accessible to as many users as possible. I apologize if that made the editing process more painful than you felt it needed to be, but I believe that it was necessary to create a better article. Please make sure to stay in contact with whatever FPEs are handling your articles and converse with them regarding the edits they feel you should make. More often than not, if you explain yourself without becoming confrontational, they'll work with you in the editing process to create the article that you want to write.

vanderbilt_grad

04/01/2011, 10:51 AM

Bullados, I was just about to edit my post a bit, but it's probably better to just say it separately.

I’m sorry if it sounded like I was criticizing your work as the moderator of that section at the time. It was not my intent to do so. Bullados, I will never ever say that you did a bad job as the moderator of the front page articles.

Even at the time I fully understood WHAT you wanted to do and WHY. I thought then, and still think, that it was a laudable aim. It's just that my article was huge and thus editing it was a lot of work ... simply writing the thing took a lot more time and effort than I expected when I started. I had expected that some edits would be needed, it's just that I hadn't anticipated having to do so much re-writing. I think, that had I better understood ahead of time what I was in for, it wouldn't have been so stressful for me ... my mental preparation would have been different. I don’t blame you or the gym for that either.

I like the way things are done now, but I’ll be the first to admit that there have been tradeoffs in making it that way. With the FP having less in the way of enforcement of standards regarding readability for new players and parents it’s lost some of the distinction it once had from the deck help area, and it’s lead to the issue that prompted RA’s creation of this thread.

Yoshi-

04/01/2011, 11:00 AM

I honestly think the problem is the format itself, good rogues are hardly doable, look at sixwewritearticlesaboutluxchompprizes, there is no content to do anything, so we get either bad decks or non at all :/

Benzo

04/01/2011, 01:41 PM

I really do not think that the question is "who" the articles are written for.
Nor do I think that what the intentions of the person who submitted the article is the issue.
I also do not think that the problem is the quality of the article from the readers who complain about the article.
I see mods who work hard at having SOMETHING to provide for the members on here to do.

I think that what the main factor on this discussion is this question: "What am I supposed to benefit from reading this article as a Pokemon Player?"

A person who submits an article who expects compensation as a motive to give a better performance will continuosly submit article after article. Over time, that can become a negative thing on here. (IMO)

A person who writes an article that wants to pass down knowelage and teach others will take the time to submit a thorough submission and ask for no recognition/compensation as seeing there hard work is passed on in order to bring in better players to the game, which keeps the game around.

I will cut to the chase with an idea on all of this.

Save articles for the front page that are written in the highest of quality/standereds from players/members who have been around, have a good rep for writting past articles, and contribute more in the "teaching" aspect of the game.

ON THE FLIP SIDE: Have a second thread that is NOT on the front page for article submitions that do not really meat the above standereds/expectations. Poeple can still have their article posted, but those articles will not be what the public sees FIRST when they log on to this site.

When a person who has upped their writting skills and contributes more then xxx number of articles in the non-FP thread, they can be "up-graded" to write for the FP article submission.

I can see one problem with my idea, and that is "there may not be enough articles submitted for the FP, so it will not always be new....."-

Are there any past articles from 2 years ago that can be re-posted? There are options out there, it is a matter of getting resources to fix/resolve issues.

Anyone can type up an article- and anyone may/may not gain any benefit from reading that article. At least this site allows for stuff to be submitted, and that is better then having no publc interaction at all, even if some of the stuff that is submitted does NOT MEET the MEMBERS standereds. Can't please everyone.

People have a choice to read what they want, if you do not like what your reading- stop- but if you read the whole thing and still do not like it, remember you had the choice to stop. So do not complain that you read something not up to what your standereds are.

MrMeches

04/02/2011, 06:30 AM

Just want to throw this in there as well... sometimes the Article's reception is dependent on the writer's online persona.

Some articles are well received, even if par at best, just because who wrote it and their standing in the community.

Also, I feel that people have come to think that FPA had to be based off of a solid Deck List that has been proven. During my stint, I felt FPA should be more information entertainment. Honestly, I tired of seeing Deck Article after Deck Article and that is why I solicited requests for VGC Articles.. never received any.... State of the Game Articles.. those got posted... Trading Forum Articles... posted.... General goings on... posted.

The FP should NOT be all about TCG in my honest opinion. It should be about POKEMON! If you go back through and look at the views, you will see that many people read non Deck Articles, just no one provide much discussion.

Also, it is an opinion that FPA should promote discussion. Isn't that what Front Pages do?? Magazines give snippits to promote discussion and entice the readers to look inside. That is what I thought should happen... maybe I was wrong.. but there were several discussions that lasted for a good while.. even on the '"Bad" FPA.

Rogue Archetype

04/02/2011, 09:29 AM

You know, if you had said something offended me and then you said this back to me ... well I would just be more offended RA.

Dang it. Yeah, you're absolutely right :(
(sorry Fish)

March madness is nearly over (my work schedule, not the sports stuff :tongue: ) , so i'm back to my old laid back and non-bitter self.

I should avoid the internet each year from Feb - March and log on again in April :/

Anyway, I'm glad that I AT LEAST didn't come across like I'm flaming the entire Front Page article section.

To be clear, I still like the FP articles. I still feel like they are useful.
I just really wanted the entire general membership of this site to have a discussion about specific purposes of front page articles.

I hope fish didn't read that as an attack. :frown:

jjkkl

04/03/2011, 07:29 AM

jjkkl, nice comments.. however let me give some insight:

Any business has to keep something 'up front' to keep discussion going. If something sits stagnant over a long period of time.. people become disinterested and then it provides a possible 'insight' to the negligence of what could be inside....

You're misunderstanding me. I'm not saying that only competitive decks or competitive players or any of that nonsense be the sole submissions to the Front Page stuff. What I am saying is that format-wise, stylistically, you have it consistent throughout all the guides. You define, enforce, and base its admission partly on whether they follow more stringent rules of submission, because it brings all subsequent articles in line.

While people may bleat all they want about 'content over style', the fact is that the argument is just a poor excuse to not have content AND style, something that should be given precedence as an idea when submitting articles. And frankly, if you're going to aim at people like newer players, they're going to want to gravitate towards more professional looking articles anyways, because they're attracted to that thing. People, ultimately, regardless of their claims, are subconsciously affected by the stylistic devices employed in the articles. The worse it looks, the more negative of an opinion it'll garner.

I'm talking about formatting and style, not the content.

Actually, every article that is submitted is reviewed by at least one Staff member, if not 2 or 3.

Articles that are submitted do not just get tossed to the FP without any review. Even if there are cases that seems to be what happened.

Bullados, Da' Fish, Lucario EX, Pokepop, myself, and others from long ago have always worked with the writer to get the best possible articles out on the FP.

While, at times, we have missed the mark, for the most part the articles have been well written and a good example of the wirters desire to put their deck out there for all to see.

Would we (the Gym) love to see more articles written by the World Champs, National Champs and other Top Tier players? Heck yes, we would, but as it was pointed out - there is nothing in it for them. We don't pay for articles, we also don't charge for the site. The income that comes in from the ads pay for the server and software. Nothing more.

I know this will ruffle some feathers, but if members aren't willing to contribute, they really don't have much right to complain about the end result.

Sorry if I sound ungrateful or needlessly contrarian, but the help I received for my articles were really nebulous in terms of precisely what it was meant to accomplish, and the major faults that neither myself nor the editors noted ended up going into the 'publication' and others ended up pointing it out. As such, I question as to whether people are devoting as much time as they should be to it if there's a problem, and whether you should get more people editing it.

2 to 3 people editing a single article? Sure, no problem, but can we really aggregate how much time is spent on proofreading those articles?