Talk:Super Bowl XL

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Super Bowl XL article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2: 365 days

Super Bowl XL was one of the Sports and recreation good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
June 17, 2006	Good article nominee	Not listed
July 19, 2006	Good article nominee	Listed
May 13, 2009	Good article reassessment	Delisted

Current status: Delisted good article

National Football League High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject National Football League, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the NFL on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.National Football LeagueWikipedia:WikiProject National Football LeagueTemplate:WikiProject National Football LeagueNational Football League articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Michigan: Detroit Low‑importance

	Michigan portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Michigan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Michigan on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MichiganWikipedia:WikiProject MichiganTemplate:WikiProject MichiganMichigan articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Detroit task force.

Pittsburgh Steelers B‑class (inactive)

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pittsburgh Steelers, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Pittsburgh SteelersWikipedia:WikiProject Pittsburgh SteelersTemplate:WikiProject Pittsburgh SteelersPittsburgh Steelers articles
B	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.

United States: Washington / Seattle High‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Washington.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Washington - Seattle.

Pittsburgh High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pittsburgh, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pittsburgh and its metropolitan area on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PittsburghWikipedia:WikiProject PittsburghTemplate:WikiProject PittsburghPittsburgh articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

There is a request, submitted by GVnayR (talk), for an audio version of this article to be created. For further information, see WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia.

The rationale behind the request is: "important article of a notable Super Bowl game".

Super Bowl Ratings[edit]

Why does it say the Super Bowl was watched by 90 million viewers. I actually added up the rating share and 18-49 demographic for the duration of the timeslots it went and then I added up the viewer numbers for all half hour timeslot and it gave me 77.9 million viewers, so could you tell me why it has a different rating than the one I have here, because I added them up correctly. Here is my source [1]--Jsalims80 01:04, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The cited source that is currently at the end of that sentence [2] says 90.7 million. That sentence has been on the article since February 2006. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 01:18, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well that is how the nielson ratings calculated it. I think that source is a liar and cheater and don't want to tell the people the truth. You have to know that sometimes when a huge event on TV happens, they'll just pick a number out of Nowhere and act like they are telling the truth, and thats why the American Media is so dishonest when reporting about these things.--Jsalims80 01:37, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if you have a different, more recent, reliable source, then feel free to change the article. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 01:47, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nielsen's matrix is very complicated, and the numbers are quite reliable. Of course the numbers cited have largely different meanings. Nielsen calculates total number of "Households," and total "Viewers." Viewers will always be higher than Households, because the average household has more than 1 viewer at any given time. It seems that he may have those mixxed up. In addition, total HH/viewers for the entire duration of the program differs from the total viewers who watched part of the program. Some people only watched a portion of the game, and therefore, pads that number considerably. Oftentimes networks will make note of the total viewers because it makes the news sound more favorable. Doctorindy (talk) 14:30, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA Reassessment[edit]

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Super Bowl XL/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

GA Sweeps: Delisted[edit]

As part of the WikiProject Good Articles, we're doing sweeps to go over all of the current GAs and see if they still meet the GA criteria. I believe the article currently has multiple issues that need to be addressed. Unfortunately, due to the amount of uncited statements, I have delisted this article. The main reason for delisting is that a large portion of the article is unsourced. Add additional sources from a variety of sources to provide a balanced representation of the information present. Perhaps sources can be pulled from the main articles linked to within the article. Look to books, magazines, newspaper articles, other websites, etc. I would also recommend altering the lead to touch on the other topics in the article besides the game summary. Although it has been delisted, the article can be return to GA status by addressing the above points. Once sources are added and cleanup is done, I recommend renominating the article at WP:GAN. If you need assistance with any of these issues, please contact me on my talk page and I'll do my best to help you out. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 00:52, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge Reaction to officiating in Super Bowl XL to this article[edit]

The content of Reaction to officiating in Super Bowl XL can easily be covered within this article. That article is nothing but a POV fork, and consensus in February seemed to favor a merge. Grsz¹¹ 14:52, 21 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to merge as per WP:RECENT. Almost five years have past. If there is much resistance, its OK to revert back and wait till next year since There is no deadline. Zzyzx11 (talk) 10:04, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep separate as there is sufficient length of content and references to maintain its own article. — MrDolomite • Talk 07:35, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reaction to officiating in Super Bowl XL could easily be merged into this article. The detail in that article is a little OTT, so it's not unfair to suggest that it be cut down a little and merged into the main article. – Pee Jay 16:35, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

With Leavy admiting that he made mistakes (August 6, 2010) it is time to merge this information into the Super Bowl XL. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tlsacjrhblack (talk • contribs) 02:14, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For now, I am going to redirect. Feel free to recover anything in the page history of Reaction to officiating in Super Bowl XL to Super Bowl XL. Zzyzx11 (talk) 04:41, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Its time to delete this white elephant - the longest bar room whine ever to appear in an encyclopedia - individual plays are not even discussed in depth - how can there be a controversy without anything to discuss. The questionable plays have been dissected elsewhere and only one has been found to be dubious which cost the seahawks 15 yards. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.10.168.252 (talk) 15:53, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I can cut this down to a paragraph. But I think the gist of it should be kept. There are still some cited sources. Even the NFL has a video posted about this subject on their official web site, rating it as one of the top controversial calls of all time.[3] It would be more of a crime for an encyclopedia to censor something that even the NFL has sanctioned on their official web site. I do not really care if you are a fan of one of the teams, or are into sports officiating, but it would appear to be bias by omission if we do not include a topic that is posted on NFL.com. Zzyzx11 (talk) 09:25, 31 December 2013 (UTC) Zzyzx11 (talk) 08:58, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Coin Toss[edit]

In the "Pre-game ceremonies" part is mentioned that Tom Brady participated in the Coin Toss and says "Brady was booed by the Pittsburgh fans in the stadium during the coin toss".This sound like a hater comment and I don't see the relevance in it. Lucasfritas (talk) 17:27, 25 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Super Bowl XL. 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:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.nfl.com/news/story/8397476
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/sports/football/13801313.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 16:37, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Super Bowl XL. 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

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: 18 January 2022).

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) 15:27, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Super Bowl XL. 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: 18 January 2022).

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) 15:58, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bad link[edit]

I noticed that the link for the Bill Nunn in the hall of famers section links to the wrong Bill nunn (the actor). 108.51.163.108 (talk) 06:26, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]