User talk:CorporateM/PCH

@CorporateM I took a shot at condensing the Sweepstakes, Odds of Winning and Prize Patrol sections (see below). Think we could call it something like "Prizes, Odds, Prize Patrol and Scammers". Thoughts?

Although Publishers Clearing House advertises its sweepstakes along with magazine subscriptions, no purchase is necessary to enter or win.[13][46][47] In 1995, Publishers Clearing House began the tradition of announcing winners of its $10 million prize just after the Super Bowl.[48] As of 2012, $225 million in prizes have been distributed.[11] Some of its larger prizes are for $5,000 a week for life,[49] or $10 million.[50] Prizes can also range from $1 Amazon gift cards to $2,500, $1 million or $3 million.[51] The odds of winning a Publishers Clearing House sweepstakes vary depending on the number of entries and what prize or sweepstakes is involved.[51] In 2011, the odds of the big prize were one in 1.75 billion.[29] The odds of winning the $10 million prize were one in 505 million in 2008[50] and one in 1.5 billion in 1995.[56] Smaller prizes have better odds that may vary from one in 223 to one in 80,000, depending on the prize.[51] In 1989 PCH began using its Prize Patrol to present surprised prize-winners with checks for $1,000 to $10 million. These events captured on video as reality TV-style videos have been used in television commercials, the company's online acquisition efforts, websites and social media communications.[10][14][57][58] As part of its advertising, PCH has used the Prize Patrol in television commercials using digitally altered videos of classic sitcoms like The Brady Bunch and Gilligan's Island[58] and at in-person appearances on TV shows like The Oprah Winfrey Show[59] and The Price is Right.[60][61] The Prize Patrol has also been spoofed by Jay Leno,[62] Conan O'Brien[63] and the cast of Saturday Night Live,[64] woven into the plots of movies such as Let's Go to Prison,[65][66] The Sentinel[67] and Knight and Day[68][69] and the subject of cartoons.[11] Sweepstakes scammers often pose as being from Publishers Clearing House and say that a cash payment is needed before they can deliver a prize.[52] According to Chris Irving from Publishers Clearing House "If you are contacted by anyone claiming to represent Publishers Clearing House and they request payment of any amount to collect a prize, do not send any money... You have not heard from the real Publishers Clearing House."[53][54] Bilbobag (talk) 16:10, 12 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's difficult to tell the difference between your version and the current article without strikeouts and bold annotations to indicate trimmed/new content. However, taking a fresh look at the current text, I would think the odds of winning should be right near the description of the prizes themselves. It seems to be missing a sentence stating the obvious (that they run a sweepstakes, how many entrants are there?, etc.) and in this way makes the assumption the reader already knows about the sweepstakes whereas they may not. We may be able to use a primary sources for the number of entrants, since the publication of this information is regulated, it's the only way to get up-to-date information and it's something we would inheritly want in the article (not a weight issue).

The most obvious opportunity for trimming is the quote from Chris Irving. Also, I typically avoid using full names for non-famous individuals. I would use something like "A company spokesperson said anybody asking for money in order to collect a prize is not actually from Publishers Clearing House." (I also prefer to avoid quotations in general, but it's just a personal preference/editorial style). I also came across this "the odds of winning the big prize were one in 1.75 billion" - a copyediting issue. These are incredibly trivial issues in the scope of the problems we encounter on a large number of Wikipedia pages, but those are my observations at a glance. CorporateM (Talk) 17:07, 12 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]