Talk:Virginia Lottery

Fair use rationale for Image:Fingersandlottery sm.gif

Image:Fingersandlottery sm.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 19:12, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

The WFL game is a disgrace. VA did offer a cash option, but it was withdrawn in May 2007. WFL needs to be retired, or at least drop KY (the only WFL participant that is part of MUSL; best known for Powerball); KY should then join MUSL's smaller jackpot game Hot Lotto, which has grown to 13 members, including VA's neighbors West Virginia and D.C.. Not only does Hot Lotto have a cash option; HL also has the "Sizzler" tripler (similar to Powerball's PowerPlay.) Meanwhile, VA and GA should heave-ho WFL and go back to a multi-jurisdictional jackpot game, but include other Mega Millions members (i.e. Michigan and Ohio had been considering a "joint" game)-how about a "Mega Millions"-group version of Hot Lotto? KY is considering joining HL in its 2009 FY. 216.179.123.111 (talk) 14:38, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Virginia State Lottery/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

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)

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

• Only 9 out of 22 footnotes are to the Virginia Lottery website. Since it is a government agency, I believe that it is a reliable source for the details of the various lottery games. So, please review the article on its merits. Thanks, Racepacket (talk) 06:51, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
• We are up to 33 footnotes but I kept the official website as a source. Racepacket (talk) 08:40, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

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)

Is it well-written?

• 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.
  • If a number starts a sentence, it should be spelled out. Racepacket (talk) 06:10, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
  • "Render as words numbers that begin sentences." per WP:MOS Racepacket (talk) 06:51, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
• "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)

Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

• valottery.com seems to suggest that the name of the organization is "Virginia Lottery"; why is the article called "Virginia State Lottery"? Steve Smith (talk) 17:18, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
  • On this point, the website is misleading. The official name of the organization is the Virginia State Lottery Department, which is governed by the Virginia State Lottery Board. I have added this to the article. Racepacket (talk) 12:20, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
• There should be a minimum of one footnote per paragraph.
  • I can't find anything in WP:MOS stating such a requirement. 12:21, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
• What makes lottery.com a reliable source? Steve Smith (talk) 17:18, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Is it broad in its coverage?

• "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)
  • I agree. That is why I added sections on security and compulsive gambling. Racepacket (talk) 12:11, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Is it neutral?

• "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)

Is it stable?

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

Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

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)

• The logo was previously added and deleted as non-free. Racepacket (talk) 12:12, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Virginia State Lottery/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk) 18:33, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Disambiguations: one found, quad and unlinked as there is no article on the meaning implied here.[1] Jezhotwells (talk) 18:37, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Linkrot: none found. Jezhotwells (talk) 18:39, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   Lottery tickets are sold through local retailers;[5] it is prohibited by law from selling tickets directly through its headquarters, and from selling over the internet This sentence is ungrammatical, the "it" needs to be specified.

   There are a large number of single or two sentence paragraphs. These need consolidating as per WP:MoS

   The lead makes no mention of the security or compulsive gambling sections. It also makes no mention of the history of G-Tech involvement.

   then-Gov. Timothy Kaine Abbreviations are not in accordance with MoS

   GTECH had made a programming error which caused the terminals to incorrectly identify on tickets that certain number combinations were winners when they were not. "incorrectly identify on tickets that certain number combinations were winners when they were not."? This is almost gibberish! Please rewrite in English.

   In the lead, Credit cards cannot be used to purchase lottery tickets.. I don't find this mentioned in the artcile. The lead should be a succinct executive summary of the article. Please read WP:LEAD.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   The 1849 Code of Virginia included a prohibition of gambling. needs a citation.

   Consistency - the titles of citations should be in sentence case, not all upper case.

   Ref #46[2] needs publisher attribution.

   What makes ref #37[3] a reliable source? This cite also needs publisher attribution. Same for ref #43[4]

   Mahalo is a wiki, what is your judgment about it being a reliable source?

   Wikis are NOT reliable sources. - removed

   Snopes is a recognized source about urban legends.

   I guess it is reliable enough as it shows its sources.

   Ref #9[5] needs page numbers

   No page number are apparent. What would you suggest?

   You could add the chapter number. - added section names

   ref #44[6] needs publisher attribution

   Some critics[who?] claim that instant winner games do more to cater to the needs of compulsive gamblers than do conventional lotteries where the outcome is not known for some time. needs attribution. - done

   Although the Lottery prohibits sales to underage players and seeks to address compulsive gambling, the Lottery's general advertising repeatedly contacts this population. needs a cite. - done

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   However, in June 2008, Scott Hoover, a Business professor at Washington and Lee University sued the lottery for $85 million alleging that it failed to stop retail sales immediately upon the awarding of the last top prize. What was the result of the lawsuit? - that was over two years ago.

   case is still pending, updated it with two sources.

   Of this total, the Lottery generated $439.1 million, or 32.1%, for public education, 57.2% was paid to players in the form of prizes, 5.6% was paid to retailers as sales commissions, and 5.4% covered the Lottery Department's operational expenses. Inconsistency in figures, the total percentages are 100.3%

   Is any information available about private companies involved in running lottery machines, printing tickets, etc.?

   Added paragraph in History section about GTECH including prior bribery controversies

   The article badly some independent commentary, from reliable third party sources, e.g. quality press, scholarly journals, on the lottery, its effects on the state and on players. - done

   Generally there is rather too much detail on the individual games. A summary style is needed in the Games section.

   Those games with separate articles are covered in summary form. There is not enough on the others to warrant subsidiary articles. What do you specifically suggest? Racepacket (talk) 01:47, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

   I think a one line summary is sufficient for each game. We don't need this excessive detail of games which may well change frequently. Also the subsections could then be removed. I believe this was raised in an earlier review. - collapsed non-notable games

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   There is little critical commentary, as noted above.

   Have found a Washington Post article

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   No images used.Y

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   On hold for seven days for the above issues to be addressed. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:23, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

   OK, thanks for addressing my concerns. I am now happy to pass this as a good article. Jezhotwells (talk) 01:13, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for taking the time for a detailed review, I will work on addressing your concerns. Racepacket (talk) 20:45, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Pick 3/4/5 deletion

Why were the details of Virginia's Pick 3/Pick 4/Pick 5 games deleted, and continue to be deleted? Among other things, they are VIRGINIA-only games. VA Pick 5 is unique in itself; it should also be desribed, with a link to the Fantasy 5 page. 207.210.134.83 (talk) 18:30, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

And AGAIN the P3-4-5 sections were deleted! BTW I also found out today that GA, KY, and VA are expected to begin a joint game on January 30, 2011, that would give winners a choice of $250,000 per year for 30 years, or a $4 million cash option. 207.210.134.83 (talk) 21:59, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Good article? Where is history?

This can't be a "good" article when it doesn't mention a historical event which made the Virgina Lottery world-famous in 1992.

See "Group Invests $5 Million To Hedge Bets in Lottery", NY Times, February 25, 1992, and "Syndicate’s First Lotto Cheque Is In The Mail", The Age (Melbourne), by Elizabeth Minter, March 12, 1992

I'm surprised there isn't an article entirely about that incident. For the purposes of this article, what was the exact game that was offered in 1992 and how is it different now?

The article Lottery Wheeling is confusing and can't be found by many logical search terms. It also doesn't mention the Va lottery 1992 incident. 165.121.80.3 (talk) 04:51, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

GA concerns

I am concerned that this article no longer meets the good article criteria because it contains numerous uncited statements, including entire paragraphs. Is anyone interested in fixing up this article, or should it go to WP:GAR? Z1720 (talk) 08:14, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

GA Reassessment

Virginia Lottery

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 • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result: Delisted. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:33, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

The article contains a lot of uncited statements, including entire sections and paragraphs. Z1720 (talk) 12:40, 15 October 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.