Talk:What Remains of Edith Finch/GA1

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

Reviewer: David Fuchs (talk · contribs) 19:28, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

doing Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs  talk 19:28, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Overall, the article is a decent start, but it needs some substantial work to reach GA status. -- Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 16:02, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
 * (1) Well written:
 * The article needs a pretty heavy copyedit. The entire article is awash with run-on sentences and excessive use of commas, one after another, including this really tough-to-read paragraph One of the most-changed stories was Walter's, Edie's son that withdrew after the death of his older sister Barbara and locked himself away in a basement bunker, only decades later deciding to leave via a tunnel and getting hit by a passing train. Originally, once in the bunker, Walter would have experienced still people that moved when he looked away, similar to Doctor Who's Weeping Angels or The Prisoner, and then would imagine himself living on a model trainset where an invisible hand would move pieces around on the set. Both aspects were to represent the passage of time for the decades Walter lived there, and out of paranoia, Walter would then escape through the tunnel and to his demise. This was ultimately trimmed down to showing Walter going through the same routine each day, eating peaches from a can, until one day he decides to escape.
 * The reception section likewise needs a complete rewrite. As it currently exists, it's just scores from reviewers one after another instead of threading together and summarizing critical consensus. I recommend the essay Copyediting reception sections for guidance on this point.
 * (2) Verifiable:
 * I have concerns with some of the sourcing used: for example, the IGN review that cites the entire gameplay paragraph does not adequately cover all the material there (for example, Edith Finch's words being graphically displayed) and the caption for the image is completely unsourced. The line The team struggled on the diver idea until Dallas came up with the idea of a shark falling into a forest with a child uttering the line "and suddenly I was a shark", doesn't seem adequately cited in the PC Gamer retrospective, as the text there doesn't mention the diver and doesn't say that the quoted line was the spark that caused the shift.
 * (3, 4, 5) Broad in its coverage, neutral, stable:
 * The article feels like it's missing details, even for GA standards. The gameplay section explains nothing of the various vignettes, besides saying they vary and the caption in the gameplay image; considering these vignettes are covered and discussed in development, at least more thorough examples should be mentioned here for context.
 * (6) Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
 * Images appear freely licensed and checked off by OTRS where applicable. I'd recommend making the link between the retouched images used here and the originals more obvious, however, since it makes it easier to verify provenance.