Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/The Suicide of Rachel Foster/archive2
The Suicide of Rachel Foster (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- Featured article candidates/The Suicide of Rachel Foster/archive1
- Featured article candidates/The Suicide of Rachel Foster/archive2
Toolbox |
---|
- Nominator(s): PanagiotisZois (talk) 01:03, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
As people say, second time's the charm. This article is about an Italian-made video game that received attention for its treatment of suicide and pedophilia. A walking simulator in the style of Firewatch, players control Nicole Wilson as she explores the Timberline Hotel, inspired by the one from The Shining. Years prior, her father Leonard had groomer her classmate Rachel Foster, and after this "affair" was discovered, Rachel killed herself. Despite attempt by the developers to treat the game's topics sensitively, most critics seemed to think they failed, romanticising the Rachel/Leonard relationship and forcing players to kill themselves in the ending. A sequel is in the works, so I guess we'll have to see if the developers took some of the criticism into account for creating The Fading of Nicole Wilson. Article has undergone some work since the previous nomination and has also been copyedited. PanagiotisZois (talk) 01:03, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
Image review and Support from Crisco
[edit]- Returning from the first go, prose seems to have been tightened a bit. I've made some edits; please review. Only concern right now is the sequel; it's standing on its own in a one-sentence section, which doesn't really say FA to me. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 19:52, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Should I just remove the section and put the citation in the lede? PanagiotisZois (talk) 20:05, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Might work under release, especially if the company cited commercial/critical success as a driving factor. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 20:27, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, outside of briefly mentioning that a sequel is in the works, nothing else is brought up in the source. Which is also the only one to even discuss the development of a sequel. PanagiotisZois (talk) 21:14, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Alright. Maybe merge to "#Release"? — Chris Woodrich (talk) 21:18, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Has been merged, per our discussion. I'm happy to reiterate my support for this article. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 22:17, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Alright. Maybe merge to "#Release"? — Chris Woodrich (talk) 21:18, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, outside of briefly mentioning that a sequel is in the works, nothing else is brought up in the source. Which is also the only one to even discuss the development of a sequel. PanagiotisZois (talk) 21:14, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Might work under release, especially if the company cited commercial/critical success as a driving factor. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 20:27, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Hiya, I saw you removed the contractions from the article and I was wondering why? I assume it is just less encyclopaedic but if there was any other reasoning I'd like to know so I can be better. Moritoriko (talk) 01:47, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Hi Moritoriko. We are not supposed to use contractions in Wikipedia's voice, per MOS:CONTRACTIONS. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:51, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for the link to the relevant section of the MOS!
It'sIt is so big that I am sure I have read that section before and then forgotten it. Cheers~ Moritoriko (talk) 02:03, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for the link to the relevant section of the MOS!
- Hi Moritoriko. We are not supposed to use contractions in Wikipedia's voice, per MOS:CONTRACTIONS. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:51, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Should I just remove the section and put the citation in the lede? PanagiotisZois (talk) 20:05, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Image review - Nikkimaria's recommendations were implemented at the first nomination, and have been maintained here. Looks good. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 19:54, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
Comments by Jon698
[edit]- This is included in the release section: "The Suicide of Rachel Foster was developed by the Italian studio One-O-One Games—using Unreal Engine 4—and published by Daedalic Entertainment.[9][7] It was directed by Daniele Azara and the music was composed by Federico Landini.[8]" Wouldn't it be more fitting to have this at the beginning of the development section? Jon698 (talk) 22:03, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- I feel like the last sentence of the second paragraph in the lede would be better as the first sentence of the third paragraph. You could also change the current first sentence to "It received mixed reviews from critics." if you did that. Jon698 (talk) 22:07, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Jon698: Both done. PanagiotisZois (talk) 22:36, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- I feel like the last sentence of the second paragraph in the lede would be better as the first sentence of the third paragraph. You could also change the current first sentence to "It received mixed reviews from critics." if you did that. Jon698 (talk) 22:07, 9 December 2024 (UTC)