Talk:Super Bowl XLIX

A source

Here is a source for this article.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d81f8a0ea/article/nfl-says-tampa-arizona-are-2015-super-bowl-host-finalists

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.6.171.239 (talk • contribs) 15:41, 1 June 2011‎

Roman numerals should be IL

Should we use the marker (sic) to indicate the deliberate error in the numeral IL for 49? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.64.26.23 (talk) 22:24, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

"Super Bowl XLIX" is a brand name. We cannot change it. What you're saying is like saying that "The Lion King" should be called "The Lion at the Top of the Food Chain". Georgia guy (talk) 23:46, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

I was confused too, so I Googled Roman Numerals, and by all accounts, 49 is correctly expressed as XLIX. That doesn't mean the Super Bowl numbering system isn't retarded though... 184.10.186.34 (talk) 00:53, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

Guess we should have a "(sic)"... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.158.139.100 (talk) 13:44, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Not unless you have a reliable published source that specifically states it's almost universally considered incorrect, while ch is unlikely. As IP 187.xxx stated, 49 is correctly expressed as XLIX, so there's no need to state it's incorrect if it isn't, which is what (sic) would imply. - BilCat (talk) 15:14, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

On a related note, is it just twisted contrariness that studiously avoids indicating that this is the 49th Superbowl, and forces readers to go look up the Roman numerals elsewhere?FDCWint (talk) 19:15, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

I learned Roman numerals way back in elementary school, are they no longer taught? --Khajidha (talk) 16:12, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

I just want to express that it's good this was taken up in the talk page without any edits to the article. To the very best of my understanding of Roman numerals and the rules regarding their construction, XLIX is correct, and IL is at the very least less favored... but probably considered wrong. Roman numerals are still treated as a decimal system, and one of the rules is that, when subtracting a value from the next numeral, both characters should be acting on the same decimal column... or the numeral that begins using the next column. That's not very well stated, but for example, IX or IV are appropriate and so are XC and XL... but IC and IL are definitely frowned upon, and no one writing the year 1999 as IMM would be taken seriously... it was MCMXCIX. Please appreciate that each decimal digit is created separately in there 1000 M, 900 CM, 90 XC, 9 IX. That's what I'm trying to explain. The first poster on this topic comes off as a tiny bit condescending or at least errantly certain, but it's IL that would be written "IL [sic]."

50.50.84.245 (talk) 14:40, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Agree. Roman numerals use a base-10 system. "IL" for 49 is not right and never has been. Not sure where this has been coming from. Shiggity (talk) 05:36, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 January 2015

In "Teams" section, claims the Seahawks had the league's lowest number of turnovers (14). This stat is incorrect. The Patriots tied for the league's lowest number with 13 turnovers. DLSmith93 (talk) 13:21, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made.  ^B E _C K ^Y _S A ^{Y L} E _S  14:19, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

5 seconds of Googling verifies what User:DLSmith93 is saying (for instance, [1], [2], [3], [4], or [5]), and I've thus removed the incorrect claim. Please let someone else answer the edit request if you're not going to provide a more helpful response. Note that the original claim that DLSmith93 wanted changed, that the Seahawks had the lowest number, was also uncited, and it's offputting and comes off as biting the newbie to dismiss an edit request for an easily-verified incorrect statistic as "calling for an uncited change" when the original statistic was also uncited and has been challenged. —Lowellian (reply) 01:08, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

This is the Seahawks third Super Bowl appearence not 2nd

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.171.96.253 (talk)

Where does it say this is the Seahawk's second Super Bowl appearance? - BilCat (talk) 03:12, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Patriots wordmark in end zone

The following gist is currently WP:OR/unverifiable per WP:V, but if it remains as it is per my OR sources, I fully expect someone to attempt to add it later on (like all the other modifications to the field markings found throughout the Super Bowl articles):

The Patriots current wordmark, introduced in 2013, includes the team's full logo in the middle, underneath the lettering.[6] To avoid redundancy, the space in the end zone where the team logo would normally be to the left of the wordmark was left blank.

As always, I am neutral on whether these facts on the field markings should be included in the Super Bowl articles. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (talk) 07:26, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Corrections

appearcence is not a correct spelling. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.216.239.32 (talk • contribs) 22:16, 31 January 2015‎

The word collectively is misused and should be deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.216.239.32 (talk • contribs) 22:17, 31 January 2015‎

Fourth Quarter summary

Currently reads:

At commencement of the second-to-last down of the game, the New England Patriots attempted to conclude the game with Tom Brady putting a knee down, but a melee broke out which resulted in one Seattle Seahawks player, Bruce Irvin, being ejected from the game for instigating the melee.[53][54] During the melee, members of both teams threw punches at one-another.[54] On the final play of the game, Brady again put a knee down, and the clock expired.[53]

Umm...no. Brady couldn't put a knee down in the end zone, because it would be a safety and Seattle would get the ball back. He had to get out of the end zone first. Please edit this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.51.16.28 (talk • contribs) 23:18, February 1, 2015‎ (UTC–5)

The play being referred to here was after the Seahawks had an encroachment penalty, which moved the ball out to the 6 yard line and enough room for Brady to safely take a knee. It was on this next play that he in fact did take a knee, but there was pushing and shoving in the process and that's when the fight broke out. As written it was correct. Doconeill (talk) 02:08, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 February 2015

In the article, it states: "Brady had another fine season in his 14th year as the team's starter, earning his ninth Pro Bowl selection with 4,109 passing yards and 33 touchdowns, with just eight interceptions." But in reality, it should be: "Brady had another fine season in his 14th year as the team's starter, earning his tenth Pro Bowl selection with 4,109 passing yards and 33 touchdowns, with just eight interceptions." He has been selected 10 times to be a Pro Bowler, not 9. 128.172.245.28 (talk) 07:49, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

• Done Thanks.—Bagumba (talk) 02:20, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 February 2015

50.12.121.31 (talk) 20:35, 2 February 2015 (UTC) At the end of the first half section the following can be added: The 14-14 tie at half time was only the third in Superbowl history. The other two ties were Superbowl XXIII (23), when the Bengals and 49's were tied at 3-3 and Superbowl XXXIX (39), when the Patriots and Eagles were tied at 7-7.

• Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. It should be a specific source that mentions the fact, otherwise it's original research to analyze history on our own. Thanks.—Bagumba (talk) 02:24, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

A Google search shows this to be so. 1, "Teams leading at halftime are 36-10 in the Super Bowl. There have been two halftime ties." 2, Superbowl boxscores Sandbh (talk) 11:49, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Tickets

I added a section about the ticket prices, which received a decent amount of news coverage, but I wasn't sure where the most appropriate place to add the section was. Please move it in the likely scenario that I didn't place it well. Some guy (talk) 20:48, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

In my opinion, it seems like it's in an okay place. Joseph2302 (talk) 00:30, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

International Broadcast

It should also be mentioned that the game aired live in France on channel W9 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W9_%28TV_channel%29 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.36.46.76 (talk) 11:16, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Not done: Please provide a reliable source with this specific information. There is no mention of the Super Bowl in your link. Joseph2302 (talk) 00:30, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Sorry about that. Here's a link from a well-known French news source. [[7]] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.36.46.76 (talk) 20:24, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

The game was broadcast live in India on Sony SIX channel. Please include this fact in the next edit.

Poor Sentence

The first sentence in the "Seattle Seahawks" section reads:

"Although the Seahawks qualified for a second consecutive Super Bowl appearance, they also started the season slowly just like New England, floundering near the season's midpoint with a 3–3 record."

Inclusion of both the terms "also" and "just like" renders one superfluous. Either "also" or "just like" should be removed.

Mimentet (talk) 18:09, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

 Done Thanks for contributing. Joseph2302 (talk) 00:30, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Ratings

In the article it says that the ratings peaked "to 118.5 million during the Super Bowl XLIX halftime show featuring Katy Perry." However from the source (Variety) it clearly states that the viewership peaked with 120.8 million viewers from 9:45-10 p.m, this can also be confirmed by tvbythenumber's article on the superbowl ratings: http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2015/02/02/super-bowl-xlix-is-most-watched-show-in-u-s-television-history/358523/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shot007 (talk • contribs) 19:10, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Y I went to change this, but it's already been updated. Thank you for helping. Joseph2302 (talk) 00:30, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

First player to be ejected from Super Bowl

The statement "After Brady took a knee, Seattle called its final time-out and Seattle linebacker Bruce Irvin rushed the Patriots huddle, starting a brawl that involved players from both teams. Seattle was penalized another 15 yards as a result, and Irvin was ejected from the game for throwing a closed hand punch at Rob Gronkowski.[73][74] Brady took a kneeldown at the 21-yard line, and ended the game,[74] walking off the field with his fourth Super Bowl win and third Super Bowl MVP award. The Seahawks became the tenth consecutive team to be dethroned of their world title, creating a record for the most years without a repeat champion. The winning Patriots remain the most recent team to repeat their Super Bowl title." should be changed to read "After Brady took a knee, Seattle called its final time-out and Seattle linebacker Bruce Irvin rushed the Patriots huddle, starting a brawl that involved players from both teams. Seattle was penalized another 15 yards as a result, and Irvin was ejected from the game for throwing a closed hand punch at Rob Gronkowski.[73][74] Irvin was the first player ever to be ejected from the Super Bowl. Brady took a kneeldown at the 21-yard line to run out the clock and end the game,[74] walking off the field with his fourth Super Bowl win and third Super Bowl MVP award. The Seahawks became the tenth consecutive team to be dethroned of their world title, creating a record for the most years without a repeat champion. The Patriots remained the most recent team to win back-to-back league championships, having done so after winning Super Bowl XXXVIII and Super Bowl XXXIX following the 2003 and 2004 seasons." - Thank you, Joshua 98.28.129.216 (talk) 02:01, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

typo in playoff section

says this: Although Green Bay kicked a field to send the game into overtime

should say this: Although Green Bay kicked a field goal to send the game into overtime

98.118.62.140 (talk) 01:31, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject Kansas City

Not that I really care, but why is this article tabbed as being within WikiProject Kansas City? --Legis (talk - contribs) 15:16, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

The explanation was added as a comment next to the project tag at the top of the page. Apparently the game was originally awarded to Arrowhead Stadium, so therefore it makes sense that WikiProject Kansas City should have an interest in this page. – PeeJay 15:35, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Super Bowl XLIX. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140718204656/http://www.barb.co.uk/whats-new/weekly-top-10 to http://www.barb.co.uk/whats-new/weekly-top-10
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/sports/wp/2015/02/01/goal-line-play-calling-dooms-seahawks-hands-super-bowl-to-patriots/
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/early-lead/wp/2015/02/02/seahawks-marshawn-lynch-isnt-exactly-money-from-the-1-yard-line/
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/seahawks/2015/02/01/pete-carroll-pass-russell-wilson-malcolm-brown-marshawn-lynch/22727797/
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://espn.go.com/nfl/playoffs/2014/story/_/id/12268853/seattle-seahawks-coach-pete-carroll-denies-reports-changed-goal-line-interception-play-pass

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:54, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Super Bowl XLIX. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150119215129/http://gazette.com/vegas-bookies-patriots-seahawks-pick-em-for-super-bowl/article/feed/196892 to http://gazette.com/vegas-bookies-patriots-seahawks-pick-em-for-super-bowl/article/feed/196892
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150202215911/http://www.wjbf.com/story/27984643/super-bowl-tickets-soar-to-8000-apiece to http://www.wjbf.com/story/27984643/super-bowl-tickets-soar-to-8000-apiece

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:14, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Roman numeral (L) instead of number (50) in “next year”

In the link for next years superbowl someone wrote 50 instead of the correct roman numeral L 62.107.173.13 (talk) 17:00, 27 February 2023 (UTC)