Talk:Cry of Fear/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Nominator: Etherial Eldon (talk · contribs) 23:19, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: A412 (talk · contribs) 23:03, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

I'll take a look at this. ~ A412 ^talk! 23:03, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

@Etherial Eldon:, I'm going to pause here and put this nomination on hold. As it stands, there are substantial problems with GA criterion 2b (cites reliable sources). I think it's fixable, but it's going to be a fair bit of work, and I'd want to be confident that there's someone (you, or another editor) who's committed to getting this to the GA standard. ~ A412 ^talk! 04:51, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

Here are some potential references to reliable sources we could base the article on, in addition to the ones already included:

• Smith, Adam (30 April 2013). "Jump Scare City: Cry of Fear". Rock, Paper, Shotgun.
• "Good Game Stories - Retro Game Reveal and Goodbye". Australian Broadcasting Corporation.
• "Test du jeu Cry of Fear sur PC". Jeuxvideo.com. 26 July 2013.

~ A412 ^talk! 05:00, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

References

As of this revision.

Spotcheck

As there are 17 references, I'll check all of them.

• [1] - Fine.
• [2] - Two problems: First, Neoseeker is not considered a reliable source, per WP:VG/S#Unreliable sources. Second, neither this reference nor [3] seem to actually source the claim that the game was praised for its innovative use of the Half-Life engine, just that it used the engine.
• [3] - It's very unclear to me what on this page is being cited, and see my note from [2].
• [4] - Fine.
• [5] - Fine.
• [6] - Is The Advocate a reliable source?
• [7] - Is Co-Optimus a reliable source? In this case, player count of the content of the game is actually the kind of self-descriptive, uncontroversial information that's fine to source from a first-party source, like the Steam entry. (See WP:ABOUTSELF)
• [8] - Is Valve Time a reliable source?
• [9] - Fine.
• [10] - Forum threads are usually not considered reliable sources per WP:USERG.
• [11] - Fine.
• [12] - I cannot determine what this is referencing.
• [13] - Fine.
• [14] - Is SUPERJUMP a reliable source? It appears to be a self-published Medium blog.
• [15] - Fine.
• [16] - Is Mash Those Buttons a reliable source?
• [17] - Fine.

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed