Talk:Fire and Darkness/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Red-tailed hawk (talk · contribs) 06:59, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

I'll take a look-see. —  Red-tailed hawk (nest) 06:59, 5 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Thank you!  → Call me  Razr Nation 02:24, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Review
I'm going to update the table below with individual comments for each of the criteria. Threaded replies within the table are probably going to be the most straightforward way to communicate on this. —  Red-tailed hawk (nest) 15:37, 6 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Some of the evaluation will come in piece-by-piece; I usually read the article over several times in the process to evaluate each criterion on its own. —  Red-tailed hawk (nest) 15:37, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi, thank you for your thorough review. I will take a look today.  → Call me  Razr Nation 13:50, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Not a problem. I'll keep this on-hold through February 15 (a week from now) so that you have time to continue fix this up. I'll do a final re-evaluation then (or earlier, should you ping me earlier saying that you've completed all your updates). —  Red-tailed hawk (nest) 15:04, 8 February 2023 (UTC)


 * I think back then I had access to the demo. I can't find it anymore. I did a search to see of I could find a magazine from back then. I found several sources but haven't had the time to properly go through them.  → Call me  Razr Nation 06:17, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I will also include the sources that you found. For now I think we can close the GA process while I work on those. Thank you, your feedback is very useful.  → Call me  <b style="color: #333">Razr</b> <b style="color:#369">Nation</b> 06:18, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Not a problem. I'll close this as failed, for now. Feel free to renominate once the issues are addressed. — <span style="background: linear-gradient(#990000,#660000)"> Red-tailed hawk (nest) 18:40, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Final review
Per the request of the nominator, I'm closing this as failed at this point. A final summary is available below:

Failed "good article" nomination
This article has failed its Good article nomination. This is how the article, as of February 15, 2023, compares against the six good article criteria:


 * 1. Well written?: Symbol support vote.svg Pass
 * 2. Verifiable?: Not yet. The article currently cites a Princeton senior thesis and cites "demo" of the game itself. The sources for the senior thesis appear to be gone from the internet; they are not archived in any internet archive and the original website no longer appears to function. Some content may plausibly be referenced by other sources, but WP:SCHOLARSHIP advises against using the senior thesis in and of itself. The use of the "demo" may be original research; I asked the nominator questions about how the demo provides the information it is cited for (i.e. is this their general experience from playing the demo), but no response occurred.
 * 3. Broad in coverage?: Not yet. I found coverage from Washington Post (focused more on developers/development but has some info on gameplay), as well as a few variants of a story from Associated Press from right after they won (version 1, version 2) (a bit on gameplay+development/developers), a follow-up story from the AP, and a two-page cover story from the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette on this game. The article needs to be expanded to include more information on the gameplay and development, and there appear to be some pretty good sources to do so.
 * 4. Neutral point of view?: Close, but not quite. There's a peer-reviewed book that appears to give some commentary on the game and its reception, but the book is currently omitted. In general we strive to fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias, represent all the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic. Given the relatively few views of the game that have been published by reliable sources, some form of the commentary from the book warrants inclusion.
 * 5. Stable?: Symbol support vote.svg Pass
 * 6. Images?: Symbol support vote.svg Pass

Closing for now, though feel free to re-nominate this when the issues listed above are fixed.

When these issues are addressed, the article can be renominated. If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to have it reassessed. Thank you for your work so far. — <span style="background: linear-gradient(#990000,#660000)"> Red-tailed hawk (nest) 18:40, 15 February 2023 (UTC)