Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/The Sims Online/archive1

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 archived by Gog the Mild via FACBot (talk) 14 May 2024 [1].

The Sims Online edit

Nominator(s): ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 23:59, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Sims Online is a massively multiplayer online game released as a short-lived and interesting chapter in the history of the Maxis game The Sims, developed by Will Wright. The game was a hotly-anticipated release that, whilst failing to recreate the commercial success of its predecessor, introduced a genre of MMO aside from the fantasy theme of its contemporaries. Discourse around the problems with interaction and communities in the game - harassment, abuse and sex - are obvious and direct precursors to those later had in 'real-life' metaverse interactions and online spaces such as Second Life. Coming across a largely barren article, the well publicised nature of the game's anticipation, disappointing critical and commercial performance and post-release problems made this a pleasure to research and write about.

I'm mindful this article has received a less than rigorous GAN process (with no disrespect to the reviewer) and no input on a peer review, so I understand some work to get this to standard may be needed. I look forward to receiving any feedback and comments to improve this article, and thank you in advance for your time.ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 23:59, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

LunaEclipse (Media review) edit

There are only two images (which are fair use) in this article and they have sufficient rationales. Support on media. I'd recommend adding an image of Wright to the Development and release section. 🌙Eclipse ^(talk) ^(contribs) 13:29, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Unfortunately there seems to be significant verifiability issues, particularly in the Gameplay section - a lot of references on spotchecks failed to verify the entirety of the content they are placed to support, and the strategy guide references are lacking page numbers. This is a significant enough issue that I would suggest withdrawal at this point, since significant re-referencing will be needed. Once that's done there are additional issues around prose and style that will need to be considered. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:37, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That is fine and I agree and completely understand, although I'm disappointed these weren't picked up either at PA or GAN. Are there any barriers to re-nominating for FAC once withdrawn or failed, similar to there being none for GA? ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 06:03, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Vrxces, after the nomination is withdrawn and archived, there's a two-week cooling-off period during which you can't renominate any article at FAC. After that you can nominate it again any time. Sorry to hear things were missed at GAN and that you got no input at PR -- sadly, we have a chronic shortage of reviewer time. You can help by thoroughly reviewing other folks' articles yourself, which will free up others to focus on the content you're working on. Best, Ajpolino (talk) 16:25, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I will archive this nomination. Given the limited feedback it received the two-week hiatus will not apply in this case. But do try to make sure that all such issues are picked up before its return. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:51, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note: This candidate has been withdrawn, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:51, 14 May 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.