Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/The Suicide of Rachel Foster/archive2

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Gog the Mild via FACBot (talk) 4 January 2025 [1].

The Suicide of Rachel Foster

[edit]
Nominator(s): PanagiotisZois (talk) 01:03, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

Image review and Support from Crisco

[edit]

Comments by and support from 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)[reply]
@PanagiotisZois: Okay just answer these few questions and you will have my support.
1. Is "particularly" necessary for "The ending, particularly"?
2. Could "The Washington Post's Christopher Byrd described the mystery as apparent and lacking in scares." be changed to "The Washington Post's Christopher Byrd criticized the "lack of scares and the lack of mystery".? Jon698 (talk) 04:34, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Jon698: Revised #2. I also removed the word "particularly" from #1, and also changed the sentence a little bit. If you think it was better as it was before, let me know and I'll change it back. PanagiotisZois (talk) 14:54, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@PanagiotisZois: Everything is on the up and up. I now support making this a FA. Jon698 (talk) 14:56, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

BP!

[edit]

Placeholder 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 03:31, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have other issues at all, but I want to point out that the 2020 Screen Rant as a source and its content should be removed since it is considered "marginally reliable" starting 2021. 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 10:28, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hey @Boneless Pizza!:. I've removed the source. Thankfully, I only used it a few times throughout the "Reception" section and it was always at paragraphs that already had enough content. PanagiotisZois (talk) 11:01, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, I found no issues so far and I would like to Support this nomination. 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 11:03, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Source review and spotcheck

[edit]

What makes JeuxOnLine a reliable source? Not seeing much else. Spot-check of this version:

  • 3 Where is radiotelephone or dialogue tree? Not sure I get "revealed at Gamescom" from this, rather than from #8 alone.
  • 4 Need some help with "simplistic" and "second half" and the voice actor bit.
    • In the review, Edwin Evans-Thirlwell brings up how the tasks in the game consist of an "undemanding to-do list" that mostly consists of going from Place A to Place B. He also acknowledges that there's a "lack of gamey elements" to the game's puzzles and tools Nicole picks up. I guess "simplistic" could be changed to "unengaging"?
    • Regarding the "second half" portion, it concerns the second-last and third-last paragraphs of his review. Having said that, rereading the article, Evans-Thirlwell doesn't actually split the game in half, so I could revise it to something like "Evans-Thirlwell enjoyed the earlier portions, but criticized the final chapters and ending as melodramatic". Or something like that.
    • Evans-Thirlwell states the game is "effectively written and acted". Granted, he could be referring to how Nicole and Irving act as participants in the story. What do you think?--PanagiotisZois (talk) 11:50, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Probably best to specify that "effectively written and acted". Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 13:23, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Jo-Jo Eumerus: I quoted the author just to avoid incorrectly translating his words. PanagiotisZois (talk) 16:11, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • 5 OK
  • 7 OK given #9
  • 8 OK
  • 9 OK
  • 10 OK
  • 14 OK
  • 16 OK
  • 17 OK
  • 18 OK but assuming that Google Translate isn't making errors.
  • 20 Not sure that I get praise for the hotel design here. Nor "puzzles"
    • In the review, Bremicker says that he would have liked if the game had one or two puzzles, saying that the players are presented with "small problems", but those can't really be described as puzzles.
    • As for the hotel, he says "An sich gefällt uns die Spielwelt von The Suicide of Rachel Foster aber ganz gut. Das Hotel ist detailverliebt gestaltet".
  • 21 One might prefer to say child abuse/exploitation here rather than paedophile. OK otherwise.
  • 22 Where does it say the earlier characterization was contradicted?
    • Maybe I'm reading too much into Vikki Blake's quote @Jo-Jo Eumerus:, but concerning Nicole's suicide attempt at the end, she says "Beyond the fact I'm struggling to believe that the arsey, obnoxious but undeniably feisty woman I've just spent two and a half hours getting to know would do this, I'm furious [her emphasis]".--PanagiotisZois (talk) 20:51, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    OK. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 13:23, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • 23 OK
  • 25 Says "won" not "nominated"?
  • 26 OK
  • 27 OK
  • 28 OK
  • 29 OK

Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:14, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The JeuxOnline source wasn't an issue the first time around at FAC, but I have started a discussion to clear that up.--PanagiotisZois (talk) 12:48, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Apologies for intruding on this conversation, but I did the source review for the previous FAC. I thought that JeuxOnLine was an appropriate source for a FAC/FA in the context that it is a review and it being cited and used to support information directly from the game's creators. I saw it more as a primary source in that regard. I cannot speak for JeuxOnLine's relability as a whole, but from my understanding (and please correct me if I am wrong), it is not being used as a review or for anything beyond the interview. Apologies again. I just thought it might be helpful to share my perspective on it as I did the last source review. Aoba47 (talk) 17:01, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    OK, but even an interview needs to be run through a reliable source. Fake interviews and stuff aren't uncommon. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:04, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not 100% sure, but I think a few years ago I saw the official Facebook / Instagram account of the game share this interview (and a few others) so clearly the developers approved of them. PanagiotisZois (talk) 10:15, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Mm, if you or someone else can find this account, we could link that instead. Official Insta or Facebook should be reliable enough for this type of information. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:36, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Jo-Jo Eumerus: The Facebook account of One-O-One Games shared the interview here. I also looked into the 2 shares the post has, and one of them is from Daniel Azara. If you want, I could also try to find whether the Instagram or Twitter accounts of the developers / publisher posted about this interview. I'm still waiting to hear whether JeuxOnLine is treated as a reliable source or not from the WikiProject Video games. PanagiotisZois (talk) 11:00, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Then it seems like the interview is reliable (for its own content) Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 07:44, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Jo-Jo, just checking: is that a pass for the source review and a pass for the spot check? Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:29, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
One last point. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 13:23, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I guess it's OK then. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 16:13, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Aoba47

[edit]
  • I believe the plot summary in the lead's first paragraph could be made more concise. The following is a suggestion, but feel free to use what you think is best: (Set in December 1993, the story follows Nicole Wilson who returns to her family's hotel to inspect and sell it. Ten years earlier, Nicole and her mother left the Timberline Hotel after learning of her father's affair with the teenaged Rachel Foster. After being trapped inside the hotel by a snowstorm, Nicole investigates Rachel's mysterious suicide, with the assistance of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) agent Irving Crawford.) I took out the bit naming Leonard as the prose did not name him earlier, and I think it can be assumed that Nicole would be looking into that while investigating her suicide.
    • Revised it.
  • I think the part on the Overlook Hotel could be better integrated into the lead. It feels a bit tacked-on at the end of the paragraph. It may be better to place it after the first sentence in that paragraph as it goes more with the choice to make a horror game than with the discussion on the more delicate topics present in the story.
    • Done.
  • I am not sure about the use of "however" in the lead when discussing the critical reviews. I understand its purpose as a transition, but it does stick out to me, and I wonder if a better transition would be possible to have this read more smoothly.
  • The source link for File:The Suicide of Rachel Foster - Gameplay.jpg does not support the image.
    • Seem that the developers changed the website or something. Used an archived version.
  • Irving is only mentioned by his first name in the "Gameplay" section, (uses a radiotelephone to communicate with Irving), which is his first appearance in the article, and he is only fully described and introduced later on in the "Plot" section.
    • Done.
  • I am uncertain about the order for this part, (in Lewis and Clark County, Montana, in the Helena National Forest), as I think it should read as (in the Helena National Forest in Lewis and Clark County, Montana) instead. In my experience, I thought the more specific area, such a forest, would go before the more broad area, in this case the county and the state.
    • Done.
  • Federal Emergency Management Agency should be linked and fully spelled out in the first instance in the article.
    • Done.
  • I am not sure about the "remains" word choice for this part, (because Rachel remains there). Are they saying that Rachel is alive and lives there? If so, I would use "lives there" or some other version, as I believe "remains" could be read a number of different ways, such as her body remaining there.
    • I went by what the person on the phone (Irving) says to Nicole. I guess it was intentionally on his end to be ambiguous.
  • I think that it would be more helpful to link "carbon monoxide poisoning" directly to the article about it or to part of the suicide methods article that discusses this form of suicide?
    • Done.
  • I saw a YouTube video saying that out of the two endings, an achievement was only given for the one that Rachel kills herself, and that it was later removed from the game. I was wondering if there was any reliable coverage on this? It would add another point of criticism about the ending as the achievement for one and not the other would seemingly push one as the true or canon ending.
    • I actually didn't know about that. Interesting. From what I've read online, it seems that the developers have actually often changed the criteria for unlocking this achievement. At one point, you'd only unlock it by having Nicole kill herself, at other times simply by finishing the game, etc. But having checked online, there doesn't seem to be any actual coverage on all this.--PanagiotisZois (talk) 19:51, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • That makes sense. I would be a little bit surprised if there was coverage on something specific like this, although it is an interesting topic. I would be curious on how the sequel handles these endings. Aoba47 (talk) 02:27, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • These parts, (as well as the depiction of their relationship) and (Watts enjoyed their relationship), are placed very closely to one another, which makes the prose quite repetitive.
    • Moved a few sentences around.
  • I would be mindful about using the same words in close proximity. An example is (Bell criticized the framing of Rachel) and (criticized the characters' and narrative's framing), in which "criticized" is used in the same context for two sentences in a row.
  • I would avoid the sentence construction "with X verb-ing" as it is something that is often discouraged in the FAC process. Examples are the following, (with Péter Nagy of IGN Hungary similarly commending it) and (with some critics arguing it was romanticized).
    • Done.
  • Could this part, (The handling of suicide, particularly Nicole's interactive suicide attempt during the ending, was criticized.), be shortened to (Nicole's interactive suicide attempt was criticized)? It seems like all the criticism is focused for this paragraph is focused on that and not other elements of suicide in the game.
    • Done.
  • I would revise this sentence: (Specifically, how suicide is employed as a plot device used solely for shock value, which detracted from the game's "potential to tell an emotional story".) The attribution should be more clearly defined.
    • Done.

I hope that this review is helpful. Once everything has been addressed, I will read through the article a few more times just to make sure that I have not missed anything. I am glad to see this back in the FAC space, and I hope that this time it will be successful. Please let me know if you have any questions about my comments, and I hope you are having a great day and/or night. Aoba47 (talk) 03:32, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Aoba47: All right. I believe I'm done with almost everything. PanagiotisZois (talk) 11:19, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for addressing everything. Just a reminder that it is discouraged to use graphics, like the one for done, for the FACs as I think it messes with the loading time for the main FAC listing. Everything looks good to me, and I support this FAC for promotion based on the prose. Aoba47 (talk) 02:27, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Does the lead not count as "the article" for purposes of fully naming a character or having FEMA be written out? Moritoriko (talk) 23:48, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No. It does not. The lead acts as an overview of the article and thus, it functions separately. It is similar to how items should be linked in the first instance in both the lead and the article itself. The lead should not have new or unique information that cannot be found in the rest of the article. Aoba47 (talk) 12:37, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And if it does include new info, for whatever reason, it should be cited. PanagiotisZois (talk) 13:10, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. Thank you for clarifying that for me. Aoba47 (talk) 13:55, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
PanagiotisZois, pls see para toward the top of the FAC instructions re. {{done}} templates and revise your replies accordingly. Tks/cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 05:40, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Drive-by comments by Gog the Mild

[edit]
  • I have made a few copy edits. If you disagree with any, could we discuss that here? Thanks.
  • Is "One-O-One Games" worth a red link?
    • I checked a few of their other games, and none of them have pages on Wikipedia, so I'm not sure how notable the company is. Besides this game, the have a recently-released survival horror game called Aftermath, and adventure game,band a few VR titles.
  • "A sequel, The Fading of Nicole Wilson, was announced in October 2024." This should be included in the main article.
    • @Gog the Mild: Initially, the article had its own section about the sequel, but it consisted of just one sentence, so it was moved to the "Release" section. Personally, I don't think that makes much sense. Do you think I should just put the information back there again?--PanagiotisZois (talk) 20:21, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gog the Mild (talk) 18:44, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well it can't go in the lead and not the article. It the sentence in the lead is the total of the information known about the sequel [?] then maybe copy it to the end of "Release" as a run on sentence? Gog the Mild (talk) 20:29, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Gog the Mild: Reinstated the material in the "Release" section. PanagiotisZois (talk) 13:22, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]


The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/The_Suicide_of_Rachel_Foster/archive2&oldid=1267408864"