Talk:Manny Pacquiao vs. Juan Manuel Márquez IV/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Good888 (talk · contribs) 10:36, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have had a look at this article and I'm afraid I don't think this meets the GA criteria at the moment.

Lead

The lead needs to be expanded to at least two paragraphs long, to meet WP:Lead and perhaps help the organisation of the article. Also, while the first reference in the lead is OK, the second is unneeded.
Ring Magazine should be linked under The Ring (magazine).

Build-up

This is where I think this doesn't reach the GA criteria at its current state. The first three paragraphs are COMPLETELY UNSOURCED. I will be adding where citations need to be added below.
"Their first fight on May 8, 2004, at the MGM Grand, ended in a draw. The second meeting on March 15, 2008, at the Mandalay Bay, was awarded to Pacquiao by split decision. Their third and final preceding match took place on November 12, 2011." All of these sentences need a citation at the end.
"Their third and final preceding match took place on November 12, 2011." It should state that it took place in Las Vegas and which arena it was in.
"While Pacquiao knocked Marquez down three times in the opening round of their first fight, many ringside observers believed Marquez won a large enough balance of the following eleven rounds to earn the decision." Source here please.
"Sources of further controversy included one judge scoring round one 10-7 for Pacquiao (as opposed to the customary 10-6 for a three knockdown round) and the widely divergent scores of the other two judges who scored the fight 115-110 Pacquiao and 115-110 Marquez respectively. It also bears noting that despite the three knockdowns in round one, referee Joe Cortez allowed the fight to continue, a decision without which the final three fights would never have occurred." Citations are needed at the end of both sentences.
"The scoring controversy continued into the second and third fights which Pacquiao won. Following each, Marquez and his supporters cried foul, citing Pacquiao's come-forward style opposed to Marquez's counterpunching style, as well as the Filipino congressman's standing in the sport and powerful promotor Bob Arum as reasons for him getting the nod from the judges."
"The majority decision following the third fight was booed loudly by the Las Vegas crowd." This, as well as the sentence above, need ciatations.
"HBO's 24/7 was broadcast on CNN in addition to HBO." May I ask, what's this got to do with the subject?
I would add the Mexico and Latin America's broadcasters in the last paragraph.
"The bout marked the 2nd time Márquez jumped from Lightweight to Welterweight. His first attempt was a September 2009 loss to Floyd Mayweather, Jr., who was making his return to boxing." Source is needed in both sentences.

Fight summary

Again, the first three paragraphs are unsourced. Also, is it possible that you could link some of the various punches?
I think ref five could be added at the end of each paragraph.
You never stated who Roach's fighter was. So this sentence should state: "Pacquiao's manager, Freddie Roach, admonished his fighter between rounds to go under the overhand right, rather than pull away, as he appeared to retreat from the knockdown punch."
"Round five, Ring Magazine's "Round of the Year" I think the award should be added in a new section. I will explain later. For now, remove it from this sentence.
"prompting ringside HBO commentator Roy Jones to profess the now famous line "He's not getting up, Jim! He's not getting up, Jim! He's not getting up, Jim!". I think a source should be here. Also I don't think a full stop is needed.
Link Fernando Beltran if possible.
The last paragraph should be removed from this section and be added to a new one I am suggesting.

Post-fight

I think this should incorporate both the Reported fight earnings and Repercussions, as well as the last paragraph in the fight summary. It should go like this:

"Manny Pacquiao was guaranteed $26 million and Juan Manuel Márquez $6 million, plus a share of the profits from a pay-per-view that exceeded one million buys. The Fight drew 1.15 million pay-per-view buys, down/up from the previous bout." "The fight was critically aclaimed by Ring Magazine. It was named Fight of the Year and Knockout of the Year, with round five garnering Round of the Year honors."

"In the immediate aftermath, both fighters praised their opponent, with Pacquiao acknowledging that he "had no excuse and that he (Marquez) deserved the victory." Marquez called Pacquiao a "great fighter" after the fight, saying "I landed the perfect punch" and that "I knew he (Pacquiao) could knock me out at any moment."

"With the fight ending in a knockout, commentators speculated that Pacquiao could retire to focus on his congressional career. Pacquiao indicated a willingness to fight and said he would want a fifth fight with Marquez. Pacquiao has since fought, beating Brandon Rios, Timothy Bradley, and Chris Algieri. Ironically, Marquez lost his opportunity of retiring on a high note, by losing to Timothy Bradley but he made up for it by beating Mike Alvarado and retaining the WBO International Welterwight crown."

That's how I think this new section should be.

International Broadcasting

I have suggested incoporating this into the Background section. There is no need for this section.

References

Although none of them are broken, there are a few other problems.
Refs 1 and 2 need their publishers
9 and 10 are bare URLs.

External links

The external link is broken.
Three succession boxes should be created for all of Ring Magazines awards.

Now I know that most reviewers would close it there and then, but since this is well-written, I am going to place on hold for seven days. References MUST be added however. Good888 (talk) 10:36, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Close - failed

With no substantial edits in seven days, I am going to have to fail this. It needs a ton of work before this can be nominated again. Good888 (talk) 09:41, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]