Skip to content
Portrait of Pelin Dragos

Pelin Dragos

Quality assurance · GRC

QA experience · 5+ years · EA Games, Funcom and TikTok

Clear test cases. Reproducible defects. Useful reports.

Functional, regression and exploratory testing, with clear test cases, reproducible defect reports and analysis of automated test results. My experience includes FIFA testing at EA Games and complex game features at Funcom.

How I approach testing

From expected behaviour to verification

Expectation

Establish the expected behaviour from requirements, designs or policies. Clarify gaps with the team, and investigate automated test results before deciding what they show.

Reproduction

Environment, build, data and the steps, written so the next person sees the same thing instead of a conclusion in a screenshot. Intermittent issues should include the available evidence and the conditions observed, even when they cannot be reproduced reliably.

Closure

Explain the impact, agree the severity and record what needs to change. Retest the fix and check related behaviour before closing the issue.

The same discipline has a public instance on this site: the build gates described under How this site is made. A criterion is written down, a script checks it, and the build fails when the two disagree.

The record

EA Games FIFA testing; Funcom feature work is covered under Gaming QA

EA Games

QA Tester

Bucharest · Jun 2020 — Sep 2022

  • Developed and executed manual black-box test scenarios for FIFA and analysed the results of automated tests.
  • Created and maintained test cases in TestRail.
  • Documented and tracked defects in Jira.

Tools: TestRail (test cases) · Jira (defect tracking)

Content and data quality at TikTok

Applying written policies consistently

At TikTok, I review content and data quality against internal policies, assess vendor outputs and lead calibration meetings. Reporting and feedback help teams interpret requirements consistently and address recurring issues.

TikTok

QA Engineer

Bucharest · May 2026 — present

  • Review platform content and data against internal policies and quality standards, supporting the quality of AI training datasets.
  • Review and correct moderation outputs from third-party vendors, checking adherence to internal requirements and safety guidelines.
  • Lead calibration meetings with internal teams and external partners to align policy interpretation and address inconsistent decisions.
  • Prepare performance reports and key performance indicators to monitor vendor quality and identify recurring data-labelling issues.
  • Coordinate feedback with stakeholders and vendors to clarify quality requirements and support process improvement.

Internal systems and vendor details remain confidential.

Governance, risk and compliance is where this method goes next. What the GRC study covered.

Let’s discuss your testing needs.

Get in touch