Wikipedia:Peer review/The Suicide of Rachel Foster/archive1

The Suicide of Rachel Foster


I've listed this article for peer review because, while I do understand criticisms that the game's handling of its sensitive themes may not have been perfect, it's still an important and overall (in my opinion) good game that tackles and focuses topics few other games dare to touch. More importantly, I wish to get this article to featured status, so any help—whether it's regarding grammar, additional sources I wasn't aware of, or anything else—would be great.

Thank you. PanagiotisZois (talk) 12:08, 13 August 2023 (UTC)


 * STANDARD NOTE: I have added this PR to the Template:FAC peer review sidebar to get quicker and more responses. When this PR is closed, please remove it from the list. Also, consider adding the sidebar to your userpage to help others discover pre-FAC PRs, and please review other articles in that template. Thanks! Z1720 (talk) 00:02, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

Aoba47

 * I am uncertain about how the word "affair" is used in the lead. I have done a very superficial look into this game, and this wording seems to be used by the developer, but I think it is a euphemism as it is tip-toeing around the fact that this "affair" is sexual abuse (and possibily statutory rape since Rachel may have been 15 and under the age of consent in the United States). I could see this wording possibly being okay if the article itself talks about it (i.e. how it is used by the developers or criticism for how it is a euphemism). However, the word "affair" is only used in the lead, which only makes it lean more toward a euphemism in my opinion I appreciate that you are working on a topic regarding a sensitive matter, and this is not meant to be negative to you (just to be clear), but I could see and understand readers not agreeing with this word choice, especially since this information is presented in Wikipedia's voice as opposed to how this issue is discussed in-game by its characters.
 * Yeah. Looking at the Wikipedia article, affair refers to a relationship where either one or both participants are married. Although this does apply to Leonard, there is an implication that affairs happen between two consenting adults. An adult man having an "affair" with a teenaged girl is not an affair. Would replacing "affair" with "relationship" work? --PanagiotisZois (talk) 19:41, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
 * It is a move in the right direction. I still think people could view it as not being direct enough that it is abuse by calling it out as such. I could see the benefit of using relationship given how this is presented in the context of the game and its story. I would personally be more direct. I would probably say something like (her father Leonard was sexually abusing the teenaged Rachel Foster and investigate Leonard's abuse of Rachel), but that might be too direct as the game does not seem to frame it that way. I would do what you think is best for now and consider what other editors have to say as this is just my opinion. It is a sensitive topic that is best approached with different opinions, and I am caught between how to represent it without euphemism while also matching how the game presents it. Sorry for the super long message. I hope it makes sense. Just not really sure here. Aoba47 (talk) 20:50, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I get it. The problem with Rachel and Leonard's "relationship" is that Rachel (like Ophelia) doesn't really have any agency in the story. She's less of a character, and more of a plot device, as she's been dead for decades by the time the story begins. And most characters in the story don't acknowledge the relationship for what it is; grooming and child sexual abuse. Nicole does not want to fully face things as she doesn't want to destroy the image she has of Leonard as a good father, Leonard himself is a pedo and in a recording he has, presents the whole as a loving relationship, Irving himself (likely because of his abusive upbringing), saw Leonard as the only person who loved Rachel, and Nicole's mother saw Rachel as a home-wrecker and murdered her; rather than a child her husband took advantage of. Overall, the game does make some problematic choices with how it presents things. Almost as if there's a dissonance between how we, the gamers, view Rachel and Leonard's relationship, versus how the characters do. --PanagiotisZois (talk) 12:09, 2 September 2023 (UTC)
 * In fact, I think that throughout the whole game, the only time Leonard is referred to as a pedophile, is in graffiti Nicole finds in one of the hotel's bathrooms, that someone broke in and wrote. --PanagiotisZois (talk) 12:10, 2 September 2023 (UTC)
 * To the best of my understanding, video game articles always have the "Gameplay" section before the "Plot" section, even in the case of more story-focused games such as this one.
 * Would it be possible to expand the "Gameplay" section? For instance, it would be beneficial to know if the player could interact with objects in the environment aside from the radiotelephone.
 * Added that during gameplay, Nicole also acquires three other objects used for puzzles. Nicole can interact and inspect objects to solve the mystery.
 * Apologies if this is an obvious question, but I am a little confused on how this game is classified in the article. It is called an adventure video game, but there are mentions of it being a walking simulator as well. Just curious which it is?
 * Admittedly, I have forgotten some things since I worked on this like a year ago; maybe two. Walking simulators are a subgenre of adventure games. I guess it's like calling Resident Evil 0 both a horror game, and survival horror game.
 * That makes sense to me. Thank you for the clarification. Aoba47 (talk) 20:50, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
 * I have never seen a "Reception" section broken down into this many categories before. I am not saying that it is wrong, but it just seems rather unusual to me and it may be something to keep in mind for a FAC.
 * This part, (Forced to stay there due to a heavy snowstorm, her only contact), is grammatically incorrect as the beginning, dependent clause is attached to the noun so it is saying that "her only contact" is stuck in a heavy snowstorm.
 * Made some minor revisions.
 * I would link horror game in the lead and the article as other video game genres are linked.
 * Super nitpick-y, but for this part (traditional horror monsters), I would just say "traditional monster" to avoid repeating "horror" twice in the same sentence.
 * Apologies again for being nitpick-y, but for this part, (from The Shining (1980) as well), I would revise it to say "from the 1980 film The Shining" to specify more clearly in the prose that the film is being discussed and linked, not the book.
 * I would avoid the "with X verb-ing" sentence construction, as shown in this part (with Nicole and Irving's relationship and voice actors also being commended), as I have seen FAC reviewers say it is not high-quality writing. I do not have a strong opinion on it either way, but I wanted to point this out to you anyway.
 * I am not sure about how "Conversely" is used in the lead. That word is supposed to show contrast but it is used between discussing mixed reviews to transition to other mixed reviews.
 * It's true. That word choice did not make sense with how the sentences were structured. Conversely (wink wink), the new structure does. I hope. --PanagiotisZois (talk) 19:30, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Nice lol. I always appreciate wordplay like that lol. Aoba47 (talk) 20:51, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Would it be beneficial to link grooming in the plot summary?
 * Yes, it does. 100%. ✅
 * Just a clarification question, but I am guessing the snowstorm started after Nicole already entered the hotel? Just reads a bit like she arrived in the middle of the snowstorm and if it is so bad that she can't leave, it made me wonder how she got there.
 * I believe that, although it was already snowing, the storm didn't actually begin until after her arrival. --PanagiotisZois (talk) 19:36, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
 * I am a little confused by this sentence: (During Christmas Eve, Nicole wakes up inside a church, which connects to the Timberline through an underground passage.) Was this a flashback or is it happening in the game's present?
 * It's in the present. Nicole starts sleepwalking while at the hotel - which she hasn't done in years - and ended up using one of the tunnels that lead to the church. Which is when she wakes up. --PanagiotisZois (talk) 12:12, 2 September 2023 (UTC)
 * I have a few comments about this part, (suffered from dyslexia). I would say "had dyslexia" as "suffered from" is overly-dramatic and inappropriate. Also, how is Rachel having dyslexia relevant?
 * Watched a walktrhough of that section to fully remember what happened. I made a few changes to the "Plot" section which hopefully makes the situations clearer. According to Irving, due to her dyslexia, Rachel was often bullied and called a "retard", crying in her room. In his eyes, Leonard was the first and only person to see what kind of person Rachel truly was, love, and try to protect her. --PanagiotisZois (talk) 11:27, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the response. I have also done some digging and from what I have read and seen, Leonard was tutoring Rachel, which is how he got so close to her in the first place. If that is true, I would add that in the plot summary as that is important context. Aoba47 (talk) 13:50, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
 * The game's poster focuses on Rachel's retainer, but it is not mentioned in the plot summary. Does it have any role in the game?
 * It appears in Rachel's hidden room that Nicole finds in the basement. Also, in a few instances (primarily in dreams I believe), Nicole sees a red butterfly which I think is actually Rachel's retainers; just upside-down. But it's not really a significant plot device, nor is it mentioned in any of the sources. Nicole finds quite a few other things of Rachel in the secret room. --PanagiotisZois (talk) 19:38, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. If it is not a big plot point in the story and is not really discussed in the citations, it is all good. Thank you for explaining this for me. Aoba47 (talk) 20:52, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
 * For this part, (The console versions were initially set to release the same year on August 26), it should be specifically mentioned that this referencing the PlayStation 4 and Xbox One releases. The specific consoles should be said.
 * I have two questions about this part, (the region's religious and legal background). The plot summary does not go into anything about religion so this caught me off-guard. Could you clarify how religion factors in the game? And by "legal background", I am guessing it is something to do with Nicole inheriting the hotel and being able to sell it? I was just not sure what this meant.
 * Since I'm not fully sure what they're trying to say, I just put the quote from the horse's mouth. --PanagiotisZois (talk) 13:21, 30 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the ping and the response. I agree that this is the best option. I wish there was more information from the developers about this choice and a part of me (and I hope this does not come across as rude or offensive) wonder how much they actually know about the legal and religious background of Montana. Anyway, I think quoting is the best option here and I agree with your choice. Aoba47 (talk) 16:10, 30 September 2023 (UTC)
 * According this interview (which is already cited in the article), the game does have a disclaimer at the start, which I think warrants a mention in the article.
 * I'm not sure this is necessary. Quite a few games have warning labels at the beginning - whether it's due to content, epilepsy warnings, or other stuff. --PanagiotisZois (talk) 19:50, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
 * I would remove the invisible comment. Three awards is not enough for a table.
 * I have two questions about this part, (the region's religious and legal background). The plot summary does not go into anything about religion so this caught me off-guard. Could you clarify how religion factors in the game? And by "legal background", I am guessing it is something to do with Nicole inheriting the hotel and being able to sell it? I was just not sure what this meant.
 * Since I'm not fully sure what they're trying to say, I just put the quote from the horse's mouth. --PanagiotisZois (talk) 13:21, 30 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the ping and the response. I agree that this is the best option. I wish there was more information from the developers about this choice and a part of me (and I hope this does not come across as rude or offensive) wonder how much they actually know about the legal and religious background of Montana. Anyway, I think quoting is the best option here and I agree with your choice. Aoba47 (talk) 16:10, 30 September 2023 (UTC)
 * According this interview (which is already cited in the article), the game does have a disclaimer at the start, which I think warrants a mention in the article.
 * I'm not sure this is necessary. Quite a few games have warning labels at the beginning - whether it's due to content, epilepsy warnings, or other stuff. --PanagiotisZois (talk) 19:50, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
 * I would remove the invisible comment. Three awards is not enough for a table.
 * I would remove the invisible comment. Three awards is not enough for a table.

I hope this review is helpful. My comments are for everything up to the "Reception" section. I would like to sit with and think about how that section is currently structured. Hopefully, this will encourage other reviewers to participate in this peer review. Best of luck with it and with your future FAC. Aoba47 (talk) 15:37, 1 September 2023 (UTC)


 * I do not think File:Rachel Foster.jpg is necessary. It is strongly encouraged to keep the usage of non-free media to a minimal unless it can illustrate something that cannot be conveyed through the prose alone. I do not think the missing poster illustrates serves that function. The caption is about the criticism of how the game treats the Leonard/Rachel relationship, and that can be understood through the prose and the image does not really add more to it. Aoba47 (talk) 13:50, 3 September 2023 (UTC)


 * I just wanted to update you that I have COVID so I will be stopping my review here. Apologies for this. Aoba47 (talk) 16:19, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Apologizing for getting COVID? Seriously? Screw the review, I just hope you get better. <3 --PanagiotisZois (talk) 22:32, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the kind words! It has really hit me hard. I've mostly been sleeping today (or trying to). Aoba47 (talk) 00:15, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Query by Z1720
It has been over a month since the last comment on this PR. Is this ready to be closed or are you still looking for comments? Z1720 (talk) 23:27, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
 * It's ok to close. :) I have other things to focus on in this time as is. --PanagiotisZois (talk) 00:46, 26 November 2023 (UTC)