Tes

Quick Crit/Concept Crit Workshop Seminar Notes

Seminar run by Taylor Itkin

  • Intro: What is Quick Crit?
    • Quick Crit is crit that is quick
      • Quickly getting to the point and important flaws of a concept without wasting time on minor details or stuff like object class
        • essentially “not wasting your own time”
  • Part One: Identifying When Quick Crit is Usable
    • Some things that might help you identify a draft that is eligible for quick-crit:
      • Before reading the draft:
          • "please crit this" pitch/request is incoherent or confusing
          • SPaG
          • The way the draft writer “speaks”/types
          • The amount of previous work for the site
            • Someone with many failed articles or no posted articles is probably a more ideal recipient for quick crit.
            • Multiple weak drafts prior can also be a factor that should be taken into consideration
    • While reading the draft:
      • Clichés
      • No apparent or discernable narrative
      • weak concepts
      • Elements that do not contribute to article in any discernible way
      • Concepts difficult for new writers to attempt (controversial or delicate topics)
      • Lack of understanding of the foundation or other GOI involved
      • TOO scientific.
    • Dealbreakers for regular crit (“what? I can't give this a line-by-line, I don't even get it. Or care.”)
      • MAJOR narrative issues
        • Major plot holes especially
      • The article is boring
        • This can be due to a variety of reasons
    • Quick-crit should only be given to drafts that you feel do not deserve much more in-depth crit
      • Point out the issue, tell them why it is an issue, suggest a fix
        • It's better to tell the author that they need to fix the core of an article than spending time fixing all of their SPaG if the article is inherently flawed.
  • Part 2: Giving Quick Crit
    • if you've been given critique, what's the #1 thing you want to feel that the critter did?
      • Help
      • Given their honest opinion
      • They have given you a direction to investigate/work on yourself
      • You never want to feel like you've been bullshitted.
        • Never sugarcoat, but never attack.
    • Critique isn't meant to be about tearing an article to shreds - it's about deconstruction and reconstruction, making an article BETTER than it is
      • Remember not to dictate the direction an author (especially a new author) should take when writing an article
        • Point in the right direction, don’t shove
    • Concept-crit and quick-crit are almost always going to be much shorter than a nitpick style critique.
      • Even when a critique is short, you want to make sure that the author actually feels like you read their draft.
        • This can be demonstrated by quoting the draft
          • Example of what needs improving/Specific errors, 3-5 quotes normally shows you read the draft in depth but are still identifying the core issue.
            • Quoting the same issue over and over can belabor the same point and should be avoided
    • After critting the examples (a good way of doing this is formatting the crit with the specific examples quoted and then critted at the top), the best thing to move to more overarching critique of the larger issue with the draft (Issues with narrative, concept, ect.)
      • Both state And Explain the issue. Give examples.
    • Following up crit with writing resources (such as a guide) from the wiki is a good way to finish
  • Part 3: Activities

Thank You for Reading! Seminars are run intermittently in #workshop and will be announced ahead of time on many SCP related channels (Including #site19 and the seminar hub). Seminars are normally held on Sundays at either 1 or 4 EST.

Unless otherwise stated, the content of this page is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License