Talk:Super Bowl XLVIII

message: Added Mike Pereira to the list of announcers who has been confirmed to be in the booth with Joe Buck and Troy Aikman.   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.19.73.151 (talk) 20:37, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Booth announcers

message: A lot of the game recap just says "Thomas" without regards to which of the two Thomases on the Denver roster is being referred to. 2605:6000:EF13:6000:9528:691B:311E:F7A (talk) 21:51, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Thomas

message: How is showing United States commercials a violation of Canadian Federal Law74.101.124.213 (talk) 20:41, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment

message: I don't know how to but I think that if someone could, please at least put up the official Super Bowl XLVIII logo. I saw it on http://www.metlifestadium.com/ but I don't know how to put it on here. JuggaloDan2013 (talk) 01:46, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The only logo I have seen so far (which is on the metlifestadium site) is the host committee logo, with the suspension bridge and the snowflake, NOT the official logo with the Lombardi trophy, which has been the standard look for the past few years. Zzyzx11 (talk) 05:12, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: It's also up on sportslogos.net, so if you're interested in the logo go to http://news.sportslogos.net/2013/03/16/super-bowl-xlviii-logo-features-more-localization.  NintendoFan (Talk, Contribs) 19:58, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Super Bowl Logo 

message: i'm not sure if it can be DI5ABLED in my browser or elsewhere, but instead of the usual mouse-over feature that i frequently use within wikipedia, i am now getting C0UPON DROP DOWN ADVERTISEMENTS.  can someone please explain to me why this is happening and how to change it?  i'd really appreciate the A5SISTANCE.
each word with a number in it originally appeared as the exact thing i am having problems with.  that is why i added numbers.
::On Microsoft IE with other similar problems, I've had some success going to [Tools] along the top and then from the drop-down menu, picking either [Pop-up Blocker] or [Manage add-ons].  FriendlyRiverOtter (talk) 03:48, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  coupon drop down advertisements 

message: ::Because they were likely to take a financial bath.  Now, this was a story from back in February 2103, a year before the scheduled Superbowl.  Hopefully, it's been resolved, but it probably is something we should include. FriendlyRiverOtter (talk) 03:42, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Local mayors threating to withhold emergency services? (February 2013) 

message: I deleted the flags of the countries whose broadcasting stations hold rights to televise the game.  I was asked which part of MOS:FLAG I was relying on. It's under the headings of Flags/ Avoiding flag problems/Appropriate use. The shortcut is WP:WORDPRECEDENT:
Flag icons may be relevant in some subject areas, where the subject actually represents that country, government, or nationality – such as military units, government officials, or national sports teams. In lists or tables, flag icons may be relevant when the nationality of different subjects is pertinent to the purpose of the list or table itself.
Words as the primary means of communication should be given greater precedence over flags and flags should not change the expected style or layout of infoboxes or lists to the detriment of words.
*These broadcast entities do not represent their countries. Each is a single broadcast entity that competes with others in the same country. In some cases, they actually compete with the country's official government broadcaster. I.e. BBC and Sky Sports - The former is the government representative.  The latter most assuredly is not. It's explicitly a competitor to the government representative. Similarly, the Brazilian government owned station is Empresa Brasil de Comunicação. ESPN Brasil is the competitor to the government representative.
*These broadcat entities are in no way similar to the examples given for appropriate use: "...military units, government officials, or national sports teams..."
*"Words as the primary means of communication should be given greater precedence over flags..." which is why the shortcut is called WP:WORDPRECEDENT. 
Please discuss this to see if we can forge a consensus. David in DC (talk) 12:10, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: seems reasonable. Frietjes (talk) 18:15, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I preface my comment by saying that I am really a neutral messenger. I was not the first to initiate putting flag icons here. I was replicating what is already on the previous Super Bowl articles dating back to the Super Bowl XLI page. My question is how this reasoning is different from, for example, List of 2012 Summer Olympics broadcasters or List of 2014 Winter Olympics broadcasters? Would it be different if it was re-formated to a table instead of a bullet list like those Olympic broadcasters pages? Granted the list on this page is not long now, but it could be as long as those Olympic broadcasters lists. Based on the page histories, apparently the use of flag icons on these Super Bowl pages was initiated be a newbie who wanted to replicate those Olympic broadcaster pages, but did not have the expertise in wiki markup code to create a table (of course that was before the VisualEditor). Again, please answer my question, because even if you remove the flag icons now, it will not stop another newbie in the future from trying to add it back, and I'm unwilling to revert and remove the flags again without a sufficient rebuttal to the newbies' "what about article x?" argument (unless, of course, you gain consensus to also remove the flag icons from those Olympic broadcaster articles too). Zzyzx11 (talk) 02:57, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

text: All I'm saying, from a practical point of view, is that if there is only consensus here to remove the flags on this page, it will be hard for me to enforce it six months from now (or even in February 2014 when the Super Bowl game is being held, and all the recentism edits will hit this article) while there is no specific consensus for this issue yet on MOS:ICON, and it conflicts with consensus on other similar pages. So, yes, I am recommending that you might as well initiate further discussions on WT:MOSICON. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (talk) 04:02, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree flags should be removed ,but maybe this is an issue for WikiProject National Football League in order to achieve con for all 40 odd super bowl articles? Gnevin (talk) 11:08, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[WP:WORDPRECEDENT]] 

message: This needs to be the logo
http://i.nflcdn.com/static/site/5.19/img/superbowl/48/sb-header-bg.png  — Preceding unsigned comment added by SancLunatic (talk • contribs) 20:15, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Super Bowl Logo 

message: The Roman Empire　fell a while ago and XLVIII is a meaningless string of letters to most people. Would it kill us to write 48 when we mean 48? Oh wait - does the Vatican have a team in this year?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Plain jack (talk • contribs) 21:24, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually most people know how to read roman numerals, it is something commonly learned in school. But no I would never be in favor of switching all the XLVIII's to 48's. You can probably get away with putting "(48)" after the first couple XLVIII'S, but nothing more.Zdawg1029 (talk) 16:51, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Roman Numerals 

message: Does anyone think it is worth adding this below to this page: 
But just this, not the bracket, just to show who was on the path to the Super Bowl. And also above the table add the "main article: 2013-2014 playoffs" linkZdawg1029 (talk) 16:50, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Playoffs 

message: No it isn't. The Bucs and Raiders were in the same division in the Bucs' inaugural season in 1976, then played in Super Bowl XXXVII.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.54.59.91 (talk) 12:41, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  First time former divisional rivals have met in the Super Bowl 

message: These 4 edits of January 20 17:15 and 17:20 (UTC) by  and other editors were over-written by the edit of January 20, 18:14.  Changes to the section Seattle Seahawks were lost.  Consider re-integrating these lost changes into the article. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 19:22, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit conflict needs resolving 

message: Should Mass Transit Super Bowl be merged with this article?  I'm not certain that I fully understand the purpose or notability of the stand-alone article as currently written.  For example, there is a similar Transportation section within 2014 Winter Olympics#Transportation, but not a robust stand-alone article noting all of the methods, schedules, and transit options associated with the event. UW Dawgs (talk) 01:35, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: The two articles very different in the their focus, one about the sports event, the other about transportation in the region hosting it. The particulars about the Mass Transit Super Bowl are unique and extensive, and the article is 25,000 characters long already.  A merge would overwhelm the Super Bowl (article now at 43,000) and make it way to long once expanded after the game. Djflem (talk) 01:47, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: The lead section has been changed to clarify the point. Z22 (talk) 05:57, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

text: You oppose the merge? Djflem (talk) 21:11, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

text: Using the known WP:BIAS as the only basis for discrediting certain editors who try to get consensus as WP:UNDUE is counter productive. We know that the majority of editors are from the United States. According to your logic, when there is a consensus being developed on an article related to the United States, we should somehow discredit those US editors without using the actual merit of their arguments? Additionally, common sense tells me that editors who usually edit a certain subject would be likely to participate in a discussion about that subject. So, according to your logic, let's say there are editors who like to edit about candies and there is a discussion about an article about candies, then those editors should be automatically discredited because it is an undue weight? They should all be banned from any discussion about candies because any consensus would be automatically considered as "alleged consensus"? My point is, if there are evidences of undue weight, give examples to point those out and discuss those specifics. Don't just assume it will be always undue weight only by the nature of the editors who are willing to participate in the discussion. We should always practice the principal of assuming good faith to honor the integrity of the editors. Z22 (talk) 23:17, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge [[Mass Transit Super Bowl]] into main article? 

message: Add to Pregame:  "Before the National Anthem is sung, Queen Latifah and the New Jersey Youth Chorus will sing America the Beautiful."
98.221.11.188 (talk) 18:21, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: , though you should provide a reference for it, otherwise it may be taken down. Epicgenius (talk) 23:27, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 30 January 2014 

message: Please change "Snipers have a better angle then anyone who is on the ground to actually hit that target." to "Snipers have a better angle than anyone who is on the ground to actually hit that target."
Ologic (talk) 01:04, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Partly done: I looked that over and wound up rewriting most of the section. Part of said rewrite removed the sentence in question. Thanks, --ElHef (Meep?) 02:49, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 31 January 2014 

message: Don't forget to add info onto the page in reference to the wind simulations they will be showing on your screen during the football game. I believe the companies name is Autodesk.
108.8.194.47 (talk) 15:52, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: please make your request in a "change X to Y" format. Also please make sure to include reliable sources with your requested edit. --ElHef (Meep?) 01:32, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 31 January 2014 

message: I'd like to remove the link from the article to the merge discussion. Given the visibility of the article over the next week or so, I don't think it's a good idea to have the very start of the article be a maintenance issue during that time.  Per WP:BRD I did so and was reverted. Hoping to quickly get consensus one way or another on removing the tag for a week or so.  Thanks. Hobit (talk) 16:48, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think there is ever a reason to temporary remove the merge tag when there is no concensus on it. Per WP:MERGE, in order to get a quick closure, an editor who hasn't involved in the discussion like yourself would make a judgement that the consensus is obvious and there is not much controversy. Then the consensus is consider reached and the merge discussion is concluded. That person would put a note on the conclusion of the merge discussion and the tags on both articles would be removed. If the consensus is not obvious, then the discussion would be left open (and the tags are preserved on the articles) for up to 30 days for other editors to participate in the discussion. Z22 (talk) 23:54, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Remove merge tag at the top of this article for a bit? 

message: Request to add the alternate officials for the Super Bowl.  Check prior Super Bowls for info (if needed).
Alternate Referee - Clete Blakeman
Alternate Umpire - Paul King
Alternate Flank - Greg Bradley
Alternate Deep - James Coleman
Alternate Back Judge - Terrence Miles
Snave59 (talk) 19:42, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done for now: A reliable source is needed in order to add this to the article. I'm finding this information in a couple of places so I don't doubt its accuracy, but what I'm finding are all forum posts and not reliable. Is there a reputable news article or press release or somesuch that backs this up? --ElHef (Meep?) 01:44, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 31 January 2014 

message: >> Pro Gamblers Profit by Amateurs Wagering on Super Bowl Overtime(Lihaas (talk) 14:36, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  []Links 

message: In the article, under "Background" and in the Winter outlook section, two things should be noted. First, according to USA Today (http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/super/2014/02/01/super-bowl-tickets-nfl/5120379/) the actual weather prediction, as of early afternoon on game day, is that temperatures are expected to remain in the low to mid 40s at kickoff, with only light winds. Second, the Farmer's Almanac, one source of all the poor weather expectations, is notoriously unreliable. (Just Gooogle "Farmer's Almanac unreliable" for articles on its problems.) Fredwords (talk) 18:32, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: The point of mentioning the Farmer's Almanac is mentioned in the next sentence: that it generated the attention of several media outlets who complained about the possible weather and location (i.e. reliable secondary sources reporting and commenting on a primary source). I added the USA Today citation. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (talk) 18:43, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Background: Winter outlook 

message: ====International broadcasters====
Country/Territory	Rights holder(s)
Arab World       	OSN Sports
                 	One HD
                 	Puls 4
                 	Telenet
                 	ESPN Brasil, Esporte Interativo
                 	ESPN America, Fox International
                 	CTV will simulcast Fox's coverage
, , , ,          	Sport 1
                 	TV3+
                 	Nelonen Pro. Retrieved December 28, 2013
                 	W9,Le Super Bowl encore 3 ans sur W9 En pleine lucarne, August 7, 2012. Retrieved October 27, 2013 BeIN SportLa NFL jusqu'en 2015 sur beIN SPORT ! Sport TV, April 24, 2006. Retrieved December 29, 2013
                 	SAT.1
                 	Fox (Greece)
                 	Now TV
                 	Stöð 2 Sport
                 	Fox Sports 2 HD, Italia 1
                 	NHK BS-1
Latin America    	ESPN, FOX Sports
                 	Televisa, FOX Sports, TV Azteca, ESPN
                 	Fox Sports (Netherlands)
                 	Sky Television, Sommet Sports
                 	Viasat 4, Viasat Sport
                 	TV5, AksyonTV
                 	Sport TV
                 	RDS
                 	NTV+
                 	Canal+
                 	TV10
                 	RTS Deux
                 	FOX Sports
(and )           	Channel 4, Sky Sports
Aldagmc (talk) 21:48, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Please provide a diff of what you would like to change first. Epicgenius (talk) 23:42, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  – superseded by the request below. Epicgenius (talk) 00:34, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 2 February 2014 

message: Country/Territory	Rights holder(s)
Arab World       	OSN Sports
                 	One HD
                 	Puls 4
                 	Telenet
                 	ESPN Brasil, Esporte Interativo
                 	ESPN America, Fox International
                 	CTV will simulcast Fox's coverage
, , , ,          	Sport 1
                 	TV3+
                 	Nelonen Pro. Retrieved December 28, 2013
                 	W9,Le Super Bowl encore 3 ans sur W9 En pleine lucarne, August 7, 2012. Retrieved October 27, 2013 BeIN SportLa NFL jusqu'en 2015 sur beIN SPORT ! Sport TV, April 24, 2006. Retrieved December 29, 2013
                 	SAT.1
                 	Fox (Greece)
                 	Now TV
                 	Stöð 2 Sport
                 	Fox Sports 2 HD, Italia 1
                 	NHK BS-1
Latin America    	ESPN, FOX Sports
                 	Televisa, FOX Sports, TV Azteca, ESPN
                 	Fox Sports (Netherlands)
                 	Sky Television, Sommet Sports
                 	Viasat 4, Viasat Sport
                 	TV5, AksyonTV
                 	Sport TV
                 	RDS
                 	NTV+
                 	Canal+
                 	TV10
                 	RTS Deux
                 	FOX Sports
(and )           	Channel 4, Sky Sports
Aldagmc (talk) 21:48, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Please provide a diff of what you would like to change first. Epicgenius (talk) 23:42, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  – superseded by the request below. Epicgenius (talk) 00:34, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: International broadcasters

message: Fox Sports on Airs only in Turkey all around the Europe please add this line
|  
|  FOX Sports 
Aldagmc (talk) 00:06, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Epicgenius (talk) 00:34, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 2 February 2014 

message: Would like to see a section called:
Halftime Technology:
and have someone post info about the technologies used to do the half-time!
Cartwrig (talk) 02:41, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Halftime Technology 

message: Broncos Win
173.71.57.34 (talk) 02:56, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: That statment is not factual. The Seahawks won the game. Roborule (talk) 03:14, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 3 February 2014 

message: change tenses to past tense
173.71.57.34 (talk) 02:58, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Already done Most have been changed by now. Roborule (talk) 03:14, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 3 February 2014 

message: change tenses to past tense
173.71.57.34 (talk) 02:58, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe most of the tenses have been changed. Roborule (talk) 03:07, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 3 February 2014 

message: Seems like an advertisement right at the beginning of an article.  Is the brand of artificial turf really of encyclopedic importance?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.106.12.255 (talk) 05:04, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, there are differences between the different types/brands of field materials. ViperSnake151  Talk   04:28, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Can "in this case FieldTurf" be moved to a footnote or something? 

message: In addition to the starting line up, consider imputing either a full roster or injury report of players who are inactive. This would inform the reader of players who were part of a super bowl roster.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.71.27.93 (talk) 05:24, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: We do provide a link to the Super Bowl Gamebook, which does provide that information.  Perhaps it would be a good idea to add it somewhere, though I would suggest after everything else has been added.  --Super Goku V (talk) 05:55, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Injury Report/Full Roster 

message: "On the third play of Denver's ensuing possession, Manning was intercepted by Kam Chancellor, giving Seattle a first down on the Denver 37"
Was Manning intercepted by Chancellor, or Manning's pass intercepted by Chancellor? If this is the play I'm thinking of, Manning was rushed and his pass was partially blocked, turning it into a flubbed toss that was intercepted. It seems that the Seahawks players on both ends of the pass deserve mention. Maury Markowitz (talk) 16:39, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: There isn't a citation for that statement, so it could be interpreted incorrectly from an unknown source.  --Super Goku V (talk) 19:07, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the "help".  Maury Markowitz (talk) 21:09, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Help?  I was just stating that there isn't a source for the section.  The only citation is a single citation from ESPN: .  --Super Goku V (talk) 04:44, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clarification requested 

message: I find:
"The Broncos trailed 22–0 at halftime and by 36–0 towards the end of the third quarter."
For consistency, you could try removing "by" from the above.
128.63.16.20 (talk) 23:06, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. CombatWombat42 (talk) 23:33, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 3 February 2014 

message: There was never a "no-fly zone" established in the airspace above the Super Bowl.  This is erroneous information, and proven false by the aerial media coverage of the game.
For the FAA's Temporary Flight restriction, see the following link: http://www.faa.gov/news/fact_sheets/news_story.cfm?newsId=15514.
Please correct this, and use more care when describing current events.
Thanks,
Mark Joinnides  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.180.48.122 (talk) 03:53, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: A quote from the page provided.. "The FAA will establish two Temporary Flight Restrictions (TFR) over MetLife Stadium. From approximately noon to 5 p.m. EST, a small, one-nautical-mile radius TFR will cover the “NFL Experience” activities at the stadium. The one-mile TFR will extend up to 5,000 feet in altitude.  From approximately 5 p.m. EST to one hour after the game ends, the FAA will establish a second TFR consisting of an outer 30-nautical-mile ring and an inner eight-nautical-mile ring." This leads me to believe that there was a no-fly zone over the Super Bowl. Roborule (talk) 04:11, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I would suggest that the FAA no-fly zone might not cover military security, unless you are referring to something else.  --Super Goku V (talk) 04:46, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

text: I think the IP is claiming that a TFR is not the same thing as a "no-fly zone", when officallay there is no such thing as a "no-fly zone" only a TFR. The media has taken to calling TFR's "no-fly zones". As for your comment about aerial media coverage, one can get an exeption from a TFR if one reaquest such from the FAA. As for "Please correct this, and use more care when describing current events.", Please be less passive agressive next time Mark, also learn what you are talking about. CombatWombat42 (talk) 22:00, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Alright, thank you for clarifying that for me. If you would like to, please consider using the Edit Protected. Roborule (talk) 12:14, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  "No-fly zone" 

message: Currently, I am seeing this:
"On Denver's first play, center Manny Ramirez snapped the ball out of shotgun formation while Peyton Manning was in the process of calling an audible, resulting in a fumble that went into the end zone."
That was the game's 1st play from scrimmage after Denver received the opening kickoff.  Also, I don't think Manning touched the ball as it went past him toward the end zone. So try this:
"On Denver's first play after receiving the opening kickoff, center Manny Ramirez snapped the ball while Peyton Manning was shifting forward (from shotgun formation) in the process of calling an audible, resulting in the ball going past Manning toward the end zone."
Could also insert this after mentioning the safety:
"(An illegal-motion penalty was called because of Manning moving forward at the time of the snap, but it was declined.)"
Did you want to insert the item about the declined penalty?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.63.16.20 (talk) 21:37, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: --JayJasper (talk) 17:44, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 7 February 2014 

message: Denver TE Julius Thomas - 4 catches 27 yards 11 long is missing from game stats, please correct it  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.144.52.126 (talk) 22:15, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  stats correction 

message: Both the quarterback Payton Manning, and the snapper, Ramirez, attributed the botched snap to crowd noise during statements after the game.
Suggested edit:
"The first play of the game resulted in the safety, caused by unanticipated crowd noise which prevented the center from hearing the snap count."[1][2][3]
[1] http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/02/02/manny-ramirez-i-never-heard-snap-count-on-game-opening-safety/
[2] http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-shutdown-corner/watch-listen-really-caused-broncos-mistake-first-snap-151952943--nfl.html
[3] http://nflspinzone.com/2014/02/03/broncos-prepared-crowd-noise/  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jd12jr (talk • contribs) 14:02, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit Request:  Safety - caused by crowd noise 

message: Is the audience figure for the US or global? It should be clarified but the source refers to "US television history" which is ambiguous. - Sitush (talk) 18:31, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  TV audience 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on Super Bowl XLVIII. 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/20160101141914/http://www.nfl.com/superbowl/results/superbowl to http://www.nfl.com/superbowl/results/superbowl
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/so-just-how-bad-was-this-rout-historically-020214
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2014/feb/02/seattle-seahawks-defense-super-bowl-manning/
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://espn.go.com/nfl/playoffs/2013/story/_/id/10393471/super-bowl-xlviii-loss-pity-denver-broncos-quarterback-peyton-manning
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://scores.espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=340202007
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140507012041/http://gawker.com/the-mass-transit-super-bowl-was-a-disaster-1514789886 to http://gawker.com/the-mass-transit-super-bowl-was-a-disaster-1514789886
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:08, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Super Bowl XLVIII. 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/20140126000950/http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/local-news/denver-broncos-super-bowl-interviews-to-be-on-cruise-ship-cornucopia-majesty to http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/local-news/denver-broncos-super-bowl-interviews-to-be-on-cruise-ship-cornucopia-majesty
*Added archive https://archive.is/20140127230724/http://nynjsuperbowl.com/ny-nj-guide to http://nynjsuperbowl.com/ny-nj-guide
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140105024210/http://www.tv10.se/nfl to http://www.tv10.se/nfl
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140203182802/http://www.northjersey.com/arts_entertainment/music/242700071_Choir_members_to_sing_at_Super_Bowl.html to http://www.northjersey.com/arts_entertainment/music/242700071_Choir_members_to_sing_at_Super_Bowl.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140205151946/http://seattletimes.com/html/jerrybrewer/2022823929_brewer03xml.html to http://seattletimes.com/html/jerrybrewer/2022823929_brewer03xml.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:13, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified