Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tim Jenkins


 * 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   delete. Only keep !votes are from socks. If somebody wishes this userified, ping me. The Bushranger One ping only 18:30, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Tim Jenkins
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

College football player that has not played professionally. Subject does not meet the general or topical notability guidelines for collegiate athletes. Media coverage merely includes a repeating of statistics and mentions in game summaries. See WP:ROUTINE. Best regards,  Cindy  ( talk to me ) 14:11, 16 June 2012 (UTC)


 * After reading the criteria and understanding it's inherent bias towards NCAA Division I players, I would argue that a Division II quarterback that holds six top 10 statistical categories for quarterbacks warrants an article. Mr. Jenkins has amazing statistics considering his commitment to a team that is in a rebuilding phase. Jenkins was the RMAC Co-Freshman of the Year award in 2009, RMAC 2nd Team Quarterback in 2010, and has won the RMAC/Rawling's Player of the week twicke. I would also put forth that being considered one of the top most impressive quarterback in Division II by Eric Galko of Optimum Scouting is noteworthy. Optimum Scouting focus is on Division II players so their placing Mr. Jenkins in the top two in Division II is significant. I would encourage Wikipedia to expand it's criteria to included players who are making a major impact in the other NCAA Divisions. I respectfully request that you reconsider your deletion recommendation and watch over the next six months as Mr. Jenkins moves from notable to NFL draft prospect.--Adh80112 (talk) 14:39, 16 June 2012 (UTC) — Adh80112 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.  struck comment of indef-blocked sockpuppet of Samjackson93436 Best regards,   Cindy  ( talk to me ) 02:23, 17 June 2012 (UTC)


 * I see this article is being considered for deletion. You should reconsider. I have seen Mr. Jenkins play both in high school and college and we will be seeing him play on Sunday's in the NFL soon. His Division II statistics are notable. His awards are impressive. If you "Google" him there is a lot of news releases and information on him that I beleive makes him "Notable". I see he is not NCAA Division I but I don't think that should keep him out of Wikipedia.  I see the part about Optimum Scouting and agree if they think he is one of the most impressive quarterbacks in Division II then that is notable.  Please reconsider your deletion and keep this article on Wikipedia.  I know it will be here soon either way but nice to see it now versus in eight months when he is drafted. --GDG93436 (talk) 15:08, 16 June 2012 (UTC)  struck comment of indef-blocked sockpuppet of Samjackson93436 Best regards,   Cindy  ( talk to me ) 02:23, 17 June 2012 (UTC)


 * I collaborated with adh80112 on this article for the last couple of weeks. He had better editing skills so let him do the posting.  I agree that this article should not be deleted from Wikipedia.  Mr. Jenkins is notable, holds major NCAA Division II records and has won numerous awards and accolades. I hope that Wikipedia sees their way to expand their information bias towards players that played in other NCAA Divisions.  I am hopeful that this important and notable article is published so it can open the door to freedom of information when it comes to players from other NCAA divisions.  I feel it is important for Wikipedia to be inclusive in your articles versus limiting it based on narrow criteria like which division an athletic happens to make their notable and worthy mark in their sport.  If the article is deleted I know it won’t be long before Mr. Jenkins notoriety will force open the information blockade that the current Wikipedia criterion poses for this article.--Samjackson93436 (talk) 16:02, 16 June 2012 (UTC) — Samjackson93436 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * I was searching quarterbacks today and was glad to see an article on Tim Jenkins. I was sad to see you are considering deleting the article. I have to agree with the others that this kid is notable and one of a kind.  I have seen him play and he has what it takes to make it in the NFL.  I read the criteria and can see that an article on him does not strictly meet the criteria. However, I agree with "Samjackson93436" in part where he talks about Tim will soon be here as I believe he will soon break out on the national stage.  I saw a twitter from George Whitfield that he worked with Tim this summer and Jenkins can make all the throws. My opinion is that Mr. Whitfield would know if someone is notable and a standout after training Andrew Luck, Cam Newton, Ben Roethlisberger and others. I would recommend that Wikipedia keep the article as it won't be long before Jenkins will be throwing the ball around on Sundays! --Collegedanwright (talk) 16:25, 16 June 2012 (UTC) — Collegedanwright (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.  struck comment of indef-blocked sockpuppet of Samjackson93436 Best regards,   Cindy  ( talk to me ) 02:23, 17 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Question for nominator. What did you find when you is a search for coverage about Jenkins? I'm behind a firewall and can't do a Google search myself right now, but do the results of the search indicate that he has not "been the subject of non-trivial media coverage beyond merely a repeating of their statistics, mentions in game summaries, or other WP:ROUTINE coverage"?
 * That said, regarding the comments made by the other accounts that Jenkins will be notable in the future: we can wait until after he achieves notability to create the article; Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. —C.Fred (talk) 16:47, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment. The results of my search were pretty much as I stated in the nomination, in addition to a handful of YouTube videos. Best regards,  Cindy  ( talk to me ) 17:41, 16 June 2012 (UTC)


 * I disagree that when you Google Mr. Jenkins you get a "handful of YouTube videos". You actually get the videos but also articles by the Denver Post, links to the NCAA statistics on him, RMAC links, and about ten pages of hits. Google says there are 61,000 results. I understand that he is close on meeting the college criteria but you should at least be accurate and fair in your objection to the article.  Thank you. --Adh80112 (talk) 18:14, 16 June 2012 (UTC) struck comment of indef-blocked sockpuppet of Samjackson93436 Best regards,   Cindy  ( talk to me ) 02:23, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
 * NCAA statistics and RMAC links equate to routine media coverage repeating statistics and mentions in game summaries. The Denver Post articles fall within this description as well. A fair and accurate description, as stated in the nomination. Best regards,  Cindy  ( talk to me ) 18:51, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
 * The Denver Post articles might be non-routine coverage, but the NCAA stats are routine. Also, Tim Jenkins is a common enough name that I wouldn't trust that all the Google hits pertain to Jenkins. —C.Fred (talk) 18:18, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment. The Denver Post actually resides within the Rocky Mountain Athletic Conference. There are 16 articles about Jenkins on the DP, all providing routine game summaries and a couple of high school recruiting notices. Best regards,  Cindy  ( talk to me ) 18:51, 16 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Fred, I appreciate your feedback. I am new to Wikipedia and might not be an expert but I did do a lot of research with my friend on Tim and feel strongly that this is a solid article. I actually restricted the Google search to "Tim Jenkins Fort Lewis Quarterback" and went through the pages and they were all on him. My buddy and I went through a lot sources to do a good job of writing the article. I just want this to be a fair review of the article using data versus just following the narrow focus of Wikipedia college athlete guidelines.  Jenkins is notable already and based on other articles I have read on Wikipedia this article belongs here for people that are researching information on him.  Thank you for looking at this with an objective perspective.  Respectfully.  --Adh80112 (talk) 18:33, 16 June 2012 (UTC) struck comment of indef-blocked sockpuppet of Samjackson93436 Best regards,   Cindy  ( talk to me ) 02:23, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment. A google search for "tim jenkins" "fort lewis" quarterback comes back with 3,240 hits. None supported notability in accordance with WP:NCOLLATH. See WP:GHITS. Best regards,  Cindy  ( talk to me ) 19:02, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Cindamuse, thank you for the input. If you do the search as I suggested "Tim Jenkins Fort Lewis Quarterback" and go through the pages you will see the results and information that supports notability. I found that it is not till about page 24 that you start to see results that have nothing to do with the Tim Jenkins I did the article on. The more specific search I did really helps to pull together the information that is out there on this notable person.  I would appreciate your help on how to make the article more acceptable and meet the criteria. I am not an expert on Wikipedia and don't have the expertise so anything constructive would be appreciated.  Respectfully,   --Adh80112 (talk) 19:11, 16 June 2012 (UTC) struck comment of indef-blocked sockpuppet of Samjackson93436 Best regards,   Cindy  ( talk to me ) 02:23, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 20:08, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 20:08, 16 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. Subject fails the notability guideline for American football and the notability guideline for college athletes. Though there are a reasonable amount of sources in the article, the large majority of them are simple repeatings of statistics, or only mention the subject in passing, which fail both the latter guideline and the "significant coverage"/"presumed" portions of the general notability guideline. A cursory search for sources found nothing useful to add to the article.  elektrik SHOOS  (talk) 01:06, 17 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. I now feel comfortable to say that there are no reliable sources providing significant, non-routine coverage. (At least not yet: if his arm is as good as the records suggest, he'll likely play professional football after he graduates. When (if) that happens, then he'll achieve notability—but until that happens, he's not notable.) —C.Fred (talk) 19:05, 17 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. Non-notable second-tier college athlete.  Subject fails to satisfy the specific notability guidelines for high school athletes per WP:NSPORTS, college athletes per WP:NCOLLATH, or professional football players per WP:NGRIDIRON, or the general notability guidelines of WP:GNG.  Currently cited sources in the article seem to fall between truly trivial mentions and typical routine coverage in recruiting and post-game articles, as well as statistics cited in various media guides and record books.  Arguments advanced above fail to comprehend the nature of meaningful coverage, confusing the required quality of media coverage with the quantity of hits in Google searches.  In short, there simply aren't any independent, reliable sources whose in-depth coverage supports the notability of the subject under any of the applicable guidelines.  Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 19:39, 17 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep: Great Person, Great Kid, been around this kid for the last couple years, keep the article or don't soon enough he will be notable to your guidelines, with that being said I would be careful about referring to division 2 athletes as second tier college athletes as dirtlawyer1 did after all its easy to hide behind a username ;) all our athletes at Fort Lewis work hard and to me no one is second tier in life or the Wikipedia world. Hunterthelawyer (talk) 21:13, 17 June 2012 (UTC)Hunterthelawyer struck comment of indef-blocked sockpuppet of Samjackson93436 ⋙–Berean–Hunter—►  02:23, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
 * See WP:ATA. Potential future notability is not a measure of present notability, and it's not Wikipedia's job to guess about the future. If he turns out to eventually be notable, then an article can be written at that time.  elektrik SHOOS  (talk) 23:13, 17 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete Normally Division II athletes are not considered notable. At this point, I see no reason to make an exception for this particular player.  I'd be open to a Userfy if someone wants to take custody of it.  As a side comment, if a Div-II player were to be notable, a quarterback of exceptional talent would be a candidate--but the player would still need to achieve notability standards through some measure such as WP:GNG.  I'm afraid I don't see that here.--Paul McDonald (talk) 03:00, 18 June 2012 (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.