Jump to content

Talk:Virginia Lottery/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]

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

I have not conducted a detailed review of this article, because at the moment it clearly contravenes point 5 of WP:SELFPUB: the article is sourced almost entirely to Virginia State Lottery's own website. The article badly needs independent reliable sources. As WP:OR puts it, "Wikipedia articles should be based on reliable, published secondary sources and, to a lesser extent, on tertiary sources." If the article can be reworked to be based primarily on reliable third party sources within a reasonable time, I will review it against the remaining criteria then. Steve Smith (talk) 18:49, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Steve Smith (talk) 18:49, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The reasoning behind requiring articles to be based primarily on secondary sources is not because primary ones are unreliable, but because they often rely on a Wikipedia author's own interpretation. Additionally, third party sources are important because they determine what points Wikipedia articles should emphasize. I'm still not sold on this article's sourcing (I note that the frequent references to the Virginia Code are also primary sources), but will provide a full review anyway.

I am failing this article. The quality of its writing leaves quite a bit to be desired, and its organization is quite poor. Many sentences are unclear (often for reasons of jargon), and the article focuses too heavily on the rules of individual games, and not enough on big picture issues. Specific comments against the good article criteria follow. Steve Smith (talk) 17:18, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is it well-written?

[edit]
  • There are some very short sections, which should either be expanded or merged. As I note later one, I think the article could be better organized in any event, and would encourage you to give serious thought to its layout and breakdown between sections.
    • I have retained the sections but improved the content.
  • "It is one of 42 lotteries which sells Mega Millions tickets." Should be either "that sells" or (my preference) "to sell". "Which" is used for non-restrictive clauses - that is, when you're adding information not key to a sentence's meaning. A good test of which word to use is to eliminate everything after "which/that", and see if the sentence's main point is preserved. In this case, changing it to "It is one of 42 lotteries." completely obliterates the sentence's main point, so "that" should be used.
  • "It is also one of 44 lotteries which sells Powerball tickets." Same thing here.
  • "All Virginia Lottery proceeds benefit its K-12 public schools" Unclear antecedent. As the sentence currently reads, all proceeds benefit Virginia Lottery's K-12 public schools. You should also wikilink K-12, which is a term that is not in use everywhere in the English-speaking world.
  • "(more than $6.6 billion since 1999)" Consider moving this earlier in the sentence, to just after "proceeds", or (my preference) incorporating it into the next sentence (something like "In 2007, the Lottery funded schools with $437 million, bringing its total since 1999 to more than $6.6 billion.").
  • "$24 million a year" Should probably be "$24 million per year", since "a year" strikes me as colloquial. I'm open to being proven wrong on this point, though.
  • "The minimum age to play is 18. Minors cannot play Virginia Lottery games and cannot cash winning tickets." This is redundant.
  • "The lottery games include Pick 3, Pick 4 and Cash 5 twice daily." The meaning of "twice daily" isn't clear. Maybe change to ", which are drawn twice daily", is that's what's meant?
  • "...as well as numerous Scratchers." Why is "Scratchers" capitalized?
  • There are quite a few terms in the "History" section which could use wikilinks.
  • "...of which $7.1 billion has supported education or the other designated purposes." What is another designated purpose? I would think that anything that lottery funds were approved to be spent on would be a designated purpose, but apparently most money has not been spent on such purposes. Was everything but that $7.1 billion payouts?
  • Some of what's in "History" (the bit about the Virginia Literary Fund", for example) doesn't really seem to be history.
  • Some of the stuff in "Governance" sounds to me like it might be exact quotes. If that's the case, it should be in quotation marks and attributed.
  • "The lottery is governed by a five member board with each member..." Comma after "board"?
  • Inconsistent capitalization of "board".
  • Inconsistent capitalization of "lottery".
  • "The Board is authorized to adopt regulations governing the establishment and operation of a lottery, including:" Shouldn't be a colon.
  • "In January 2008, then-Gov." "Governor" should be spelled out.
  • The second paragraph of "governance" could be merged into one sentence, since "announced a change in the leadership of the Lottery" doesn't really add any information.
  • For that matter, isn't the appointment of an executive director in 2008 "History"? I'm really having trouble understanding the article's organization.
  • "...two times a day..." Try "twice". Also, see above on "a" vs. "per". Same issue occurs several times later in the article.
  • "...draws 3 sets of 10 balls..." "three" and "ten" should be spelled out. Same issue occurs several times later in the article.
  • "Pick 3 draws 3 sets of 10 balls 0 to 9." The meaning of this sentence isn't clear.
  • "Players can play for an exact match, an any-order match, a 50/50 split between exact and any order, a combo bet that multiplies the desired bet by all arrangements of a number, and an exact "pairs" match of two of the three digits." This needs clarification, if it's going to remain in the article.
  • "Triples such as 333 are commonly sold out as they can only be played in exact order." I'd suggest losing the italics. While it's possible to infer the meaning of "triples" in this context, it should be explained. Same goes for "quads" later in the article.
  • "Minimum wager is $1, but lesser amounts may be wagered on any given play (a single play may be wagered at 25 cents and/or 50 cents in addition to $1) so long as at least $1 is wagered for all given plays at a time." I'm having trouble parsing this sentence.
  • "Unlike Mega Millions and Powerball, there is no cash option for the top prize." What does this mean?
  • You italicize the names of some games, but not others.
  • "Forty-two lotteries..." Should be numerals.
  • "On March 6, 2007, Mega Millions awarded a jackpot of $390 million -" Shouldn't be a hyphen (see WP:MOSDASH).
  • "Starting in February 2010, the Mega Millions lottery is expanding to states that participated in the Powerball lottery." Out of date now; should be worded in the past tense.
  • "However, in June 2008, Scott Hoover, a Business professor..." Not sure that "however" is appropriate here. The first sentence explains the second sentence, rather than constrasts with it.
  • "but like scratchers their status as a winner or loser is determined when it is printed" Pronoun disagreement (goes from plural to singular).
  • "In addition, forging lottery tickets or tampering with the lottery is a Class 5 felony." What's a Class 5 felony? Could it be wikilinked? Steve Smith (talk) 17:18, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

[edit]

Is it broad in its coverage?

[edit]
  • "In 2005, four mobility impaired residents sued the lottery seeking accommodations for customers seeking to play while confined to a wheelchair." This could use some elaboration, since it's not immediately apparent what's preventing wheelchair-bound residents from playing the lottery just like anyone else.
  • "Mega Millions jackpot winners can choose cash in lieu of annuity payments." Is there any information on what the relative level of the cash payment would be?
  • Overall, I think the article provides too much emphasis on minutiae of individual games, and not enough on placing the subject in context (as a government department, a political issue, etc.) Steve Smith (talk) 17:18, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is it neutral?

[edit]
  • "Critics note that the lottery revenues..." The verb "note" suggests that the critics are stating a fact. Is this universally accepted as fact? If not, another verb, such as "suggest" or "charge", would be more neutral. Steve Smith (talk) 17:18, 9 July 2010 (UTC) Changed it, but it is universally accepted that the lottery does not increase education funding. Racepacket (talk) 10:45, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is it stable?

[edit]

Pass. Steve Smith (talk) 17:18, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

[edit]

The general consensus seems to be that the use of non-free logos is acceptable in articles about the organization whose logo it is. Accordingly, you may wish to add the Virginia Lottery logo; I'll leave that up to you, though. Steve Smith (talk) 17:18, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Virginia_Lottery/GA1&oldid=1141750012"