Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joe Jackson (defensive end, born 1996)


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia  ᐐT₳LKᐬ  03:21, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

Joe Jackson (defensive end, born 1996)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails to meet WP:NCOLLATH ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia  ᐐT₳LKᐬ  14:48, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 18:12, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 18:12, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 18:16, 16 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep. WP:NCOLLATH is an inclusionary standard not an exclusionary one. College athletes who receive significant coverage in multiple reliable sources can also qualify under the over-arching WP:GNG standard.  Here, Jackson has received such significant coverage in a number of major metropolitan newspapers (in addition to smaller outlets).  Examples include this from The Palm Beach Post and this from the Miami Herald and this from the Sun-Sentinel. Enough to pass GNG already, and this guy is just getting started and expected to be a superstar. Cbl62 (talk) 19:45, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
 * First source is a blog post, which is not reliable. Second counts, third is just a passing mention regarding the contributions of freshman players. Per WP:crystal we can't keep the article just because he is expected to be good. And WP:NCOLLATH states when a college athlete is notable... I'm not sure what you mean. ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia  ᐐT₳LKᐬ  19:48, 16 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Blogs are not all unreliable. Depends on the blog.  A blog  from a major metropolitan daily, featuring the work of one of its professional staff writers, is reliable. See WP:NEWSBLOG. In any event, WikiOriginal-9 has now found abundant further examples of significant coverage. Cbl62 (talk) 21:12, 16 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep Meets GNG. WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 20:50, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Most of those are either routine coverage or articles that mention his name but are on a broader or completely different topic. Comparing another player to him or discussing the recruiting class is routine. It's all routine. I don't believe that every college athlete warrants an article. ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia  ᐐT₳LKᐬ  21:26, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Feature articles about college athletes are not routine. Your last comment is a red herring. Nobody is saying that every college athlete warrants an article. Only the exceptional ones like Jackson (< 0.1% of college athletes) who generate significant coverage in multiple, reliable sources. Cbl62 (talk) 03:17, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Have you seen the coverage of college football (and basketball) in their respective cities and states? It's extensive. But, alas, I am alone here. Keep your article, I don't want it. ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia  ᐐT₳LKᐬ  03:19, 17 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep some of the sources provided above go beyond routine coverage and are sufficient to pass GNG. Lepricavark (talk) 21:49, 16 August 2017 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.