Talk:Five Nights at Freddy's: Security Breach/GA1

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

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

Reviewer: ForksForks (talk · contribs) 15:56, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

• Well written: Yes, I had relatively few copyedits I picked up myself in a close reading of the article. I think the plot summary can seem to kind of throw out a lot of information, but this is sort of the fault of the game.
• MOS Rules with lead, layout, w2w, etc: Yes, plot and lead seem to be within guidelines to me. No references in the lead. Plot is appropriate per WP:PLOT and compared to other FNAF GAs.
• Broad coverage: This article goes above and beyond what I'd have predicted someone would be able to write about for the 9th game in the series.
• NPOV: The critiques section seems fair to me, it balances some positive and negative reviews and gives an overall impression of what critics thought. I wish there were more ratings in the review box.
  • I nearly had to write this Reception section with only three reviews, this isn't really something in my control. I think after FNAF 4 critics stopped extensively covering this series.
• Stable: Yes
• Illustration: In line with other FNAF articles, and the non-free use rationale is correct.
• References: Lets dig in...
  • Found a citation to Reddit, I can't find a secondary source to support this, though it does come from Scott himself. Willing to hear back from you on this and hear an argument either way for its inclusion.
    • If I where taking this any further than GA, then I would most definitely replace it, but I think for GA since its from Scott himself it should be fine, though I do admit it's pretty borderline and I didn't add the source.
  • Source spot checks. I checked against WP:VG/RS and also tried to see if there was any copyvio, didn't see any on a quick look:
    • Metacritic article: Matches article content.
    • Escapist article: quotes used for "most of the budget"... but this is phrased differently in the article. Quote or reword.
    • PlayStation Blog: Matches article content.
    • Kotaku article: Matches article content.

This is very likely a pass pending the couple of questions I had. In general just read over the plot summary again and try to tighten up any prose you can, I can see people saying it's long, but in my opinion it's fine.

Thank you for taking a look at this, I've answered the above questions. As for the plot, WP:VG/PLOT advises keeping a plot summary for games under 700 words, and 300 words for DLC. While Ruin goes over 300 (though no way to work around it), the main game plot is contained to only 552. Honestly I'm surprised I managed to contain the plot as it is from what it used to be. λ NegativeMP1 17:42, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Noted everything, changed the quotation bit myself. Nice job on this one. ForksForks (talk) 17:59, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.