This article is within the scope of WikiProject Gambling, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Gambling on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GamblingWikipedia:WikiProject GamblingTemplate:WikiProject GamblingGambling articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Horse racing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Horse racing on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Horse racingWikipedia:WikiProject Horse racingTemplate:WikiProject Horse racingHorse racing articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Maryland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Maryland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MarylandWikipedia:WikiProject MarylandTemplate:WikiProject MarylandMaryland articles
A good attempt, but the purpose is to describe the image for someone who cannot see the picture. So "A picture of..." doesn't help a lot. Buildings are tough, but for the first image, I would probably go with "A square building with red and white vertical striping along the roof. A banner on the front shows Rosecroft's logo and the statement "Welcome Back Racing Fans!" " Resolute 23:28, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sources look good, references I spot checked supported their claims and indicated no concern with close paraphrasing
Redundant to note twice in the opening paragraph that Miller died in 1954. I would remove the first mention. (in fact, you actually note three times in the opening paragraph that Miller died!)
"Vogel made several mistakes that hurt the horse racing industry in Maryland, and three years later, he was arrested for possession of cocaine, and his company went into bankruptcy" - run-on sentence. Consider rewording
" Rosecroft was then sold to Weisman's Colt Enterprises. In that same year..." - "In that same year" lacks context since you have not identified the year Colt Enterprise bought the facility.
"After filing for bankruptcy once again, Rosecroft Raceway closed down in 2010. Several states legalized casinos to help its racetracks, which increased the purses, handle (daily betting turnover), and attendance, making Rosecroft an unprofitable business." - I am somewhat confused by this. At first blush, I was going to suggest reversing these two sentences, as you appear to place the consequence (track closing) before the cause. However, I don't see how the legalization of casinos, designed to help the tracks, made Rosecroft unprofitable. This needs to be explained better
Played around with the sentences. See if you want me to change it further. —Michael Jester (talk·contribs) 21:36, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Better. I realized reading later in the article that Rosecroft struggled because states other than Maryland legalized casinos. I changed "several states" to "nearby states" to reflect this. Feel free to change back if I have changed the intended meaning. Resolute 23:28, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Miller family
"William E. Miller—a harness racing Immortal..." - the linked article suggests one can only become an "immortal" after they have died. Consequently, this is anachronistic. Easily fixed by noting he was a "future immortal".
Most of the third paragraph is listed in proseline. Consider changing up the start of a few sentences so they don't all begin with "In year, something happened".
I think I changed it a bit. Am I going in the right direction with it? —Michael Jester (talk·contribs) 21:38, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yup, looking better. Resolute 23:28, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Mark Vogel
"The year-round racing Rosecroft was awarded lowered the excitement for the locals, and Rosecroft was not capable of attracting a new market, and attendance figures lowered." - run-on sentence
" From the gambling revenue, 7 percent goes to the horse-racing industry, but Rosecroft is only allowed to have up to $1.2 million for a minimum of 40 live-racing days from 2012 to 2015. This is only possible, however, if the owners "agree to rehire workers employed at the facility prior to the end of live racing on June 27, 2008; and recognize collective bargaining agreements that were in place as of June 1, 2008". - Is this passage in the wrong place? It seems to be talking about the present situation under Penn, and not the situation under Cloverleaf. The notations on what Rosecroft is allowed from 2012-2015 is particularly confusing, given the very next statement is that the track closed in 2010.
I just took some of it out. It was confusing, and I couldn't find the old law. —Michael Jester (talk·contribs) 21:36, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Overall
Looks pretty good, but a few rough edges as noted above. I am placing on hold pending the resolution of these issues. Regards, Resolute 21:09, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Much better. I am passing this, though I would say the alternative text still requires work. Well done. Regards, Resolute 23:28, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Resolute! I am happy about this GA. Happy editing! —Michael Jester (talk·contribs) 23:34, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
b (citations to reliable sources): 