Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/OneShot/archive1

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) 19 January 2024 [1].

OneShot[edit]

Nominator(s): Skyshiftertalk 23:13, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about OneShot, a popular indie game released in 2016 known for its fourth-wall-breaking narrative. This article was first written and expanded by Mir Novov, and I later did many edits to make it reach the current GA status and opened peer reviews. I believe the article now meets the FA criteria. Skyshiftertalk 23:13, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments and Support from NegativeMP1[edit]

Okay, I find it kinda funny how two video game FACs went up on the same day, in the same hour, both about indie games. I'll take a look at this article soon. NegativeMP1 23:59, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lead
  • Looks fine.
Gameplay
  • What exactly do these dreams contain, or do for the gameplay?
  • Added.
Plot
  • Looks fine.
Development and release
  • Don't think specifying 2022 is necessary when you already said "the next year".
  • Removed.
Reception
  • Looks fine.
Article overall is solid. Since the two issues I pointed out aren't that major, gonna go ahead and give this my support. NegativeMP1 19:09, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! Skyshiftertalk 19:44, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from ChrisTheDude[edit]

  • "in other ways, which includes" => "in other ways, which include"
  • "In there, they encounter" => "There, they encounter"
  • "Niko's goal is to carry the sun through its three areas" => "Niko's goal is to carry the sun through the world's three areas"
  • " Nafria stated that it is generic" => " Nafria stated that it was generic" (to be consistent with the previous sentence) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:44, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Done Skyshiftertalk 12:00, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Skyshifter, as per the instructions at WP:FAC, please avoid using graphic templates like {{done}} as they are known to cause issues with the loading time of FAC page. FrB.TG (talk) 14:48, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I am sorry. Skyshiftertalk 14:57, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from TechnoSquirrel69[edit]

We meet again, Skyshifter! I've been looking for a good FAC to review, and this seems like an excellent choice, especially since I still feel like I didn't completely hold up my end of the quid pro quo bargain. I'll be back with a review shortly. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 16:09, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for the delay! I always forget just how much the holidays throw my schedule off. Anyways, have a review. Citations numbers from this revision.

  • I think the details of which websites distrubute the game is a bit too much for the second sentence in the lead. I would cut it down to just "... it was released for Windows on December 8, 2016.".
    • Done
  • Unlink "player"
    • Done
  • In the lead and § Gameplay: the player is a separate character → the player is separate
    • Done
  • Related to the above, I'd probably mention somewhere that this is unusual for video games of this kind, as a layperson is not guaranteed to know that.
    • Will try to find a source for it.
  • Unlink "lightbulb"
    • Done
  • the user account they have signed in with → the name provided in their user account
    • Done
  • § Plot is currently at 797 words, and I feel it can easily be brought below the 700-word mark recommended by WP:VG/PLOT. In fact, I don't feel the game's plot is of sufficient complexity to require the maximum length, and should probably be even shorter — especially the pre-Solstice section.
    • I've reduced its size quite a bit in a previous PR, so I'm unsure how I would reduce it even more (Glen is at a sentence and a half...) I also see some people who count sub-sections as another separate Plot section instead of summing both for the 700 words length, but I don't know if this is correct or not. Either way, specific comments on what to remove would be appreciated.
    As a general note, I feel like the section is too focused on maintaining the strict chronological order of how the player discovers information. This might be important in some contexts, but take something like "... emerging in a barren wasteland" and then "They are currently in the Barrens." a sentence later. I understand that we only find out the name of the place after talking to the robot, but maintaining that narrative flow is not helpful to someone reading an encyclopedia, so I would merge these. Also, rather than cutting whole parts out, I feel like there are several individual sentences that could be tightened up instead. Semi-arbitrarily picking an example again, "three phosphoric items ... the final one." could easily be "three phosphoric items: the amber, the feather, and a third one gifted by George." (11 words shorter). Hopefully that gives you some ideas; let me know if you'd like any additional feedback. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 17:13, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@TechnoSquirrel69: Done Skyshiftertalk 20:31, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • In § Plot: Niko, a catlike child → Niko; it's already mentioned in § Gameplay
    • Done
  • which addresses ... their computer., as above
    • I think this, or something similar, is necessary because "player" could still be interpreted as Niko here.
  • Remove quotation marks from terms like "Solstice" and "Glen" throughout the article
    • Done
  • Nightmargin (Casey Gu) → Casey Gu (under the pseudonym Nightmargin), since the rest of the article subsquently refers to them as "Gu"
    • I'm changing Gu to Nightmargin throughout the article instead, since she is better known by that name.
  • I would get rid of citation 15 since citation 16 already verifies the statement.
    • Done
  • The gender of Niko → Niko's gender
    • Done
  • Optionally, I would add a statement like "This article uses singular they for consistency." to justify the placement of the footnote in the prose.
    • Done
  • Italicize and correct capitalization for all instances of the game's title in the references
    • Done
  • In citation 1: OneShot on Steam → OneShot
    • Done
  • In citations 1, (15), 21, 22, 25, 26, 32, and 33: use |publisher= so the website isn't italicized
    • Done
  • In citation 2: [INTERVIEW] OneShot → [Interview] OneShot
    • Done
  • In citation 7: Edition - A → Edition {{endash}} A or whatever alternative you prefer per MOS:DASH
    • Done
  • Similarly as above in citation 16
    • Done

More comments to come. Feel free to reply in line, and let me know if you have any questions! —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 20:21, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

More comments are here. Use the same revision for citation numbers.

  • The comment about Psycho Mantis feels too detailed for the lead, I'd remove it and just mention the fourth-wall-breaking narrative.
    • Done
  • In § Gameplay: With these concepts, OneShot was officially described as a game where "the world knows [the player exists]"; this quote doesn't add very much to the description of the gameplay and feels almost promotional in this context.
    • Done; also removed from the lead
  • I'd prefer a couple of words explaining what RPGMakerWeb is.
    • Rephrased.
  • "finalized product ... original version" is too closely paraphrased. I would rephrase the first sentence and just turn the second one back into a direct quote.
    • Paraphrased
  • "The game's atmosphere was inspired by the RGB color model" This statement is so vague it means nearly nothing. I'd prefer removal but wouldn't mind if it was paraphrased carefully, though I have no idea how you'd do that.
    • This makes sense, actually. The game is separated into three areas: Refuge (which is mainly red-toned), Glen (which is mainly green-toned), and Barrens (which is mainly blue-toned). Unfortunately, this isn't explicitly stated by the source, but that's what it means with RGB color model inspiration. Maybe I could do something like "The game's areas were inspired by the RGB color model"?
    Ah, that makes more sense. I suppose I wouldn't know since I never actually played past the Barrens myself. Anyways, I found this source that briefly mentions that the areas go in "reverse RGB order"; maybe that's enough to clarify the statement for a general audience. Also, do you know if the color palette gets brought up at all in that "interview" video? —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 17:13, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Don't know if I'm allowed to comment under others reviews or not, but I want to point out that Gaming Trend is marked as an unreliable source at WP:VG/RS. λ NegativeMP1 17:37, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    You're definitely allowed, and I appreciate the note! I guess I should have looked at the perennial sources lists first... —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 17:39, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm changing to "game's world", should be slighly better. Skyshiftertalk 20:22, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • along with Metal Gear Solid
    • Previous sentence (and source) only talked about Psycho Mantis specifically, while in this other interview they mentioned the entire game.
  • "they wanted to do a unique take on the story ..." This phrasing almost makes me think Undertale and OneShot are two interpretations of the same story. Rephrase as you see fit.
    • Done
  • OneShot's fifth anniversary
    • It's a relevant date, in my opinion, to show that they had a reason to announce it at that specific date.
  • review aggregator Metacritic → review aggregator site Metacritic (MOS:SEAOFBLUE)
    • Done
  • In § Reception: remove the duplicate link "operating system"
    • Done
  • No other comments for this section; good work here!
    • Thank you! Reception sections are always a hurdle for me, so it's good to hear this!
  • In citation 19: add |via=[[YouTube]]
    • Done; also added channel name as publisher
  • In citation 24: link IGN
    • Done

Also, I'm refraining from giving any more detailed feedback on § Plot until it's been whittled down per my previous comments; could you ping me once you're all done with that? —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 23:51, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@TechnoSquirrel69: I'm honestly not sure how to reduce the plot even more, as I said above. If you have any suggestions feel free to post them. Skyshiftertalk 16:41, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Last round of comments. I'm not going to conduct a full source review for this candidate — I'd prefer to leave that to a more experienced FAC contributor — but I'm taking a closer look at some of these websites and have concerns about whether they're "high-quality reliable sources", as required by criterion 1c. Here are the ones that are sticking out the most to me:

  • Heavy: I'm not seeing that this publication has an editorial process, and the writer appears to be a student.
    • This is an interview, and I'm exclusively using the developer's words.
  • KOMODO (livestream): This is not a formal interview, and is basically just unedited footage of the developers answering random questions from viewers in the chat.
    • It's still what the developers said, correctly attributed to them. This should count as a self-published source.
  • Tumblr and Tumblr: Yes, the blogs are run by the developers, but what's the rationale for accepting self-published sources in this case?
    • It's important to confirm that Niko's gender is ambiguous, and the developers are the only ones who do it; secondary sources use either "he" or "she" randomly for Niko.
  • rpgmaker.net: Another blog, and it's not clear whether this post was written by the developers or a community member. I'm pretty sure both of the statements this source verifies are covered in other sources, so I would get rid of it in a hurry.
    • This is written by the developers; I went through other games in the website and found descriptions like this one.

Great work on the prose, by the way — § Plot is looking a lot better! —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 07:07, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Skyshiftertalk 12:46, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Cool, it seems most of the questions about the sources I had fall under the WP:ABOUTSELF umbrella, so I have no further concerns that can't be addressed during a source review. Really nice work on this candidate, Skyshifter; I'm happy to support! —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 16:40, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! Skyshiftertalk 17:45, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment from NatwonTSG[edit]

I'm not sure is this should be removed or not because I never work on a featured article before so, some of the links here such as "items" and "lightbulb" should not be link because according on WP:OL, it say that everyday words should not be linked like items for examples so. NatwonTSG2 (talk) 21:00, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Item" is linked to Item (game terminology), which is an important link IMO.
Removed lightbulb. Skyshiftertalk 20:41, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oh okay and thank you for that @Skyshifter. NatwonTSG2 (talk) 16:15, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from the Night Watch[edit]

Saving a spot, probably will get some in within the next week or so. The Night Watch (talk) 19:54, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments are still forthcoming, should be able to get them in today. The Night Watch (talk) 20:03, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just a standard notification, but as a first time FAC nominator you need to go through a spot-check on the sources before this article can be promoted. I will make a few checks sometime after I've finished my other points.
  • Steam is not a high-quality reliable source and should be replaced as the source for the Linux release if possible. Even the developer's own website would be alright as a source for this release, but Steam just will not do.
  • I couldn't find a replacement. This is an official post by the developers, though; would it really be necessary to change?
  • Yes, it should be changed. Steam is a storefront and not a reliable source. At this point a primary source from social media or an official website would be a better alternative.
  • WRT Steam, I think it's a reliable source for what is on Steam, and they are kinda prominent so if we are supposed to include such content at all they'd be a suitable source for it. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 19:21, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I digress, but if that is truly the only source that contains such information, you can cite it. The Night Watch (talk) 19:38, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The game received positive reviews from critics, who praised aspects including the story, art, and gameplay" is confusingly worded and doesn't provide a significant amount of information on how the game was received. Perhaps something more like "The game received positive reviews from critics, who praised the story, art, and metafictional aspects of gameplay" and then add an interesting factoid about how the game was received. For example, in The Longing, critics compared the game to life under COVID-19 quarantine.
  • Tried something.
  • The Development seems to be heavily based upon primary sources which are not used sparingly, as per the source analysis by TechnoSquirrel above. Since the sources are of dubious reliability and are mostly primary/self-published, I would say the development section is currently not up to the sourcing standards for FA.
  • I've removed the "Oneshot Livestream" source. I'd like to keep most of these if possible. OneShot's development was almost exclusively discussed in primary sources or interviews. If I were to remove them, the "Development" section would extensively lose information, something that I want to avoid. (necessary reminder that I'm new to FAC so if I'm completely wrong here just tell me, but I thought WP:ABOUTSELF would apply here)
  • ABOUTSELF would be fine if the cited content is overall used sparingly, but since there are several primary sources not of high-quality making up the bulk of this section, some information would have to be cut to meet the sourcing requirement. The potential problem would be that the ensuing development section would not be comprehensive enough for the criteria, but at the moment I would suggest culling some information and see what is left over afterwards.
  • I've removed "Heavy" and removed one of the usages for RPGMaker. Now the section is mostly formed by interviews published in reliable sources per WP:VG/S.
  • The Reception section has many scare quotes that could easily be paraphrased and currently take away the quality of the prose. Doing so would greatly improve the writing quality and make it more engaging to read.
  • Made some changes.
  • There is some word choices that should be changed, such as using "awakens" rather than "awakes". I will go over a deeper check later, but that was one wording issue that showed up at first glance.
The Night Watch (talk) 02:11, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I will work on spot-checks starting this Wednesday. The Night Watch (talk) 17:08, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Spot checking sources, 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 12, 18, 20, 21, 22, 26, 28 The Night Watch (talk) 17:23, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • 1: Article is paywalled, but was able to find a way to access it. Confirmed
  • 2: Developing film part confirmed, Psycho Mantis also confirmed, but the IndieCade information is not confirmed. The article says that the author was at IndieCade, but the post does not say that OneShot was featured at IndieCade.
  • Added another source confirming the IndieCade appearance, which also led me to add information about the game's nomination at the event. Skyshiftertalk 19:24, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • 3: All confirmed
  • 5: All confirmed
  • 6: All confirmed
  • 8: I see that the game changes the wallpaper, but it doesn’t say that this leads to any clues. Am I missing something? Everything else confirmed
  • 9: All confirmed
  • 12: All confirmed
  • 18: All confirmed
  • 20: All confirmed
  • 21: The source does not say fifth anniversary; otherwise confirmed
  • Would it be fine to keep? I think it's relevant to mention that the announcement was done in a relevant date in the context of the game. Skyshiftertalk 19:24, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Skyshifter: I had the same issue with the "fifth anniversary" comment when I did my review, and I'm just realizing that you decided not to follow my suggestion. Maybe this is getting a bit too far in the weeds, but just inserting that comment might be bordering on original research since it's not called out in the source. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 21:00, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Removed. Skyshiftertalk 21:05, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • 22: All confirmed
  • 26: All confirmed
  • 28: All confirmed
I will do one last brush-up after this. The Night Watch (talk) 18:20, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
support The Night Watch (talk) 22:40, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Source and image review[edit]

I kinda wonder if all of these nonfree images are necessary, I see the rationales but currently it's a bit of an edge case. There isn't consistent ALT text. Source-wise, reviewing this version and spot-check upon request. Going to list out some of the sources:

Source formatting is mostly consistent except as noted above. Some of the article seems to be sourced to the videogame itself, nothing overly interpretative that I see. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:43, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Few quick notes: I intend to perform the spot-check after the sourcing is cleaned up. TouchArcade, Gematsu and Nintendo Life are considered generally reliable per the WP:VG/S. Not sure if Brett Makedonski is considered a reliable author, haven't looked into their history. RPGMaker appears to be a blog and would not consider it high quality. The Night Watch (talk) 15:31, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agree for TouchArcade, Gematsu and Nintendo Life. Brett Makedonski was an official writer for Destructoid, so it's not WP:USERG. RPGMaker is a primary source; it was written by the developers. I've removed one of its uses to make the usage as minimal as possible. Skyshiftertalk 00:07, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the non-free use images:

  • The image presented in the infobox is the main logo/identification for the subject of the article.
  • The image in the Plot section presents the game's main gameplay atmosphere (top-down perspective, etc.) This is comparable to many video game articles which have an image illustrating the Gameplay section. Most of the game is played in that perspective and presents similar elements.
  • The GIF currently in Gameplay is a necessary image because of the game's unusual fourth-wall-breaking nature, which I'm not sure can be explained with text only. Having to drag the actual window of the game around your screen to solve a puzzle is something unusual that in my view require a non-free illustration.

Skyshiftertalk 00:23, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi Jo-Jo, as this is a first-time nomination, I would be grateful if you could do a plagarism check and a source to text accuracy check. Thanks. If and when you are happy with the standard source and image reviews that is. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:44, 18 January 2024 (UTC) Bleh! Ignore that, sorry. Let me know when and if you are content with the image and source reviews. Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:55, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Meh, seems OK then. Although the images are somewhat on the edge. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:08, 19 January 2024 (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://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/OneShot/archive1&oldid=1197310426"