This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Super Bowl XLVII article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | A news item involving Super Bowl XLVII was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 4 February 2013. | ![]() |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report 3 times. The weeks in which this happened: |
This page has archives. Sections older than 60 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
Later this section should be looked into about how the nfl may have manufactured the power outage to keep get the niners back into the game and how it affected the momentum of the game. Some one will do a story on this for sure to provide sources. 24.112.193.54 ( talk) 03:14, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
Silliness aside, the blown transformer was most likely avoidable and it would interesting to know the story about it. I suspect it was more a failure to test or properly plan for capacity than conspiracy by the NFL. I am curious if any of the advertisers are seeking compensation or if the extra ad ran was paid for. Alan.ca ( talk) 15:06, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
But, seriously, I believe this event warrants its own entry on the table of contents. For one, I only turned it on upon hearing of the power outage. What if the power had been out for hours. Would the NFL have postponed the rest of the game until the next day? 72.129.148.164 ( talk) 04:57, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
What about the incredible rookie Colin Kaepernick. Starting Qb in the Super Bowl his first season! And he isn't even mentioned!,,,,,, 24.167.99.174 ( talk) 07:50, 8 August 2013 (UTC)spw 8/8/13
"The Ravens are descended from the Cleveland Browns franchise, which joined the NFL along with the 49ers when the AAFC disbanded in 1949." If you check the Cleveland Browns, Baltimore Ravens and Cleveland Browns relocation controversy articles, you will see that the NFL does not officially recognize the Ravens as being the same team as the pre-1996 Browns. -- Khajidha ( talk) 18:32, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
It would be interesting to know what the legal status of the players' contracts with the Browns would have been at the time, had any new Raven decided they didn't want to relocate to Baltimore. Having signed with the Browns the NFL would HAVE TO go deal with the players' union if some player refused to play. Of course, I don't know what the players' union contract says about such a situation. Or if any language regarding such quirks is embedded in each player's individual contract. It would seem to me, that if the NFL considered Baltimore a new franchise; an expansion, and the Browns left behind, that any of those "relocated" players could have just up and signed with another team, the one they signed with no longer in being. I'll have to repost this on the talk page for the Browns Baltimore controversy. 72.129.148.164 ( talk) 04:30, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
This game featured 13 different scoring plays, the most in Super Bowl history (Super Bowl 37 between Bucs-Raiders had 12), should this be mentioned somewhere in the article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Compy90 ( talk • contribs) 22:08, 4 February 2013
Under the Background section is the following:
On winning, Baltimore became the only team in the NFL to have appeared in multiple Super Bowls without losing one; in fact, they supplanted the 49ers in this role. Currently, this phenomenon can only be repeated if the Ravens or the New York Jets play the Tampa Bay Buccaneers or the New Orleans Saints in a subsequent Super Bowl.
What "phenomenon" does this sentence refer to? Is it:
OR
Either way, the prescribed matchups for repeating said phenomenon are incorrect. Rdfiasco ( talk) 04:05, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Super Bowl XLVII. 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:
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 16:07, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Super Bowl XLVII article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | A news item involving Super Bowl XLVII was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 4 February 2013. | ![]() |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report 3 times. The weeks in which this happened: |
This page has archives. Sections older than 60 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
Later this section should be looked into about how the nfl may have manufactured the power outage to keep get the niners back into the game and how it affected the momentum of the game. Some one will do a story on this for sure to provide sources. 24.112.193.54 ( talk) 03:14, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
Silliness aside, the blown transformer was most likely avoidable and it would interesting to know the story about it. I suspect it was more a failure to test or properly plan for capacity than conspiracy by the NFL. I am curious if any of the advertisers are seeking compensation or if the extra ad ran was paid for. Alan.ca ( talk) 15:06, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
But, seriously, I believe this event warrants its own entry on the table of contents. For one, I only turned it on upon hearing of the power outage. What if the power had been out for hours. Would the NFL have postponed the rest of the game until the next day? 72.129.148.164 ( talk) 04:57, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
What about the incredible rookie Colin Kaepernick. Starting Qb in the Super Bowl his first season! And he isn't even mentioned!,,,,,, 24.167.99.174 ( talk) 07:50, 8 August 2013 (UTC)spw 8/8/13
"The Ravens are descended from the Cleveland Browns franchise, which joined the NFL along with the 49ers when the AAFC disbanded in 1949." If you check the Cleveland Browns, Baltimore Ravens and Cleveland Browns relocation controversy articles, you will see that the NFL does not officially recognize the Ravens as being the same team as the pre-1996 Browns. -- Khajidha ( talk) 18:32, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
It would be interesting to know what the legal status of the players' contracts with the Browns would have been at the time, had any new Raven decided they didn't want to relocate to Baltimore. Having signed with the Browns the NFL would HAVE TO go deal with the players' union if some player refused to play. Of course, I don't know what the players' union contract says about such a situation. Or if any language regarding such quirks is embedded in each player's individual contract. It would seem to me, that if the NFL considered Baltimore a new franchise; an expansion, and the Browns left behind, that any of those "relocated" players could have just up and signed with another team, the one they signed with no longer in being. I'll have to repost this on the talk page for the Browns Baltimore controversy. 72.129.148.164 ( talk) 04:30, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
This game featured 13 different scoring plays, the most in Super Bowl history (Super Bowl 37 between Bucs-Raiders had 12), should this be mentioned somewhere in the article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Compy90 ( talk • contribs) 22:08, 4 February 2013
Under the Background section is the following:
On winning, Baltimore became the only team in the NFL to have appeared in multiple Super Bowls without losing one; in fact, they supplanted the 49ers in this role. Currently, this phenomenon can only be repeated if the Ravens or the New York Jets play the Tampa Bay Buccaneers or the New Orleans Saints in a subsequent Super Bowl.
What "phenomenon" does this sentence refer to? Is it:
OR
Either way, the prescribed matchups for repeating said phenomenon are incorrect. Rdfiasco ( talk) 04:05, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Super Bowl XLVII. 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:
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 16:07, 5 October 2017 (UTC)