Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Omarius Hines

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
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.

Spartaz Humbug! 05:34, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply
]

Omarius Hines

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

Omarius Hines (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Hines is a non-notable college athlete that never made it to the NFL. He fails

« Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 16:33, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply
]

Note: This discussion has been included in the
« Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 16:33, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply
]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 17:18, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 17:19, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 17:19, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, the coverage spans three 11 years and five multiple distinct sources. Also it is interesting that you claim to have read the sources on Newspapers.com since most of them are not even available there. Cbl62 (talk) 05:48, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
« Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 16:05, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply
]
A suggestion: If you do not have access to and have not reviewed the source material, do not make the affirmative assertion that "all of the coverage" in the article is "prototypical" or "common". (That statement suggested that you had, in fact, reviewed "all of the coverage" in the article, when you had not.) Maybe also consider not nominating articles for AfD where you do not have access to the cited sources. Cbl62 (talk) 17:46, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Your point is moot, as you obviously knew I did not have access to all the articles. Again,
« Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 20:36, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply
]
I agree with Cbl62 on this one--the statement in the nomination "All of the coverage of Hines in the article is..." claims that "all" the coverage in the article has been reviewed, when it is later stated that it has not been reviewed. No one else can "know" what anyone does or does not have access to offline. The point of the suggestion is a request to avoid making AFD nominations without first completing a little research to avoid unnecessary work and a disruptive environment. Sure, you can do it anyway--and you can also be asked not to do it. But I'm going to add
WP:DONTLIE and please in the future do not say "all of the coverage of _____ in the article is..." when you have not actually looked at "all of the coverage." I don't think you were being intentionally disruptive and simply make a quick poor choice of words which is very forgivable. My point is to identify the issue and ask that you and all of us be more careful with our wording in the future.--Paul McDonald (talk) 14:16, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply
]
Paul, a recommendation somewhat related to this discussion: your use of shortcuts to express your opinions almost always come across as insulting. This is especially true when you are dealing with regular editors that are very knowledgeable of Wikipedia policies and guidelines. It's even worse when they are basic essays that you wrote (and not actual policies or guidelines) that convey simple concepts, like "don't lie" (there's a wonderful essay on the subject of using essays/shortcuts to make a point, but for me to link it in this discussion would be hypocritical, wouldn't it?). Do you really think someone needs to read your essay to understand why lying is bad...? Do you really think it's helpful for you to go around telling people not to lie on Wikipedia? Is that ever really necessary? Is it ever done in a way that isn't condescending?
In response to your actual comment, not sure how you think you are helping. Cbl62 expressed some concerns, and I clarified my comments and asked them to wrap-up that part of the discussion. Did you think that I didn't understand Cbl62's comments? Also, just to be clear, telling someone "don't lie" is accusing them of lying. If, as you say, you believe that I "simply [made] a quick poor choice of words", then how was your comment helpful in any way? Other than to make a point?
« Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 17:23, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply
]
Apparently it is necessary. I've been active on Wikipedia since 2007, you're the first editor to tell me that my use of shortcuts was insulting. I am sorry you feel that way. Those are your feelings, not my intent. Shortcuts to essays, guidelines, and policies are quite common, widely accepted, and found to be useful. If you want to discuss this further, we should take it to another forum to keep this discussion germane.--Paul McDonald (talk) 19:56, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The article needs improvement, but Hines was a play-maker at tight end, wide receiver and running back for Florida in the Urban Meyer years. He passes
    WP:GNG. The following are examples of significant coverage in multiple, reliable sources spanning an 11-year period from 2007 to 2018: (1) "Gator made" (Hines profile), Corsicana Daily Sun, 11/27/07; (2) "Waiting for his chance" (Hines profile), Corsicana Daily Sun, 9/3/09 (477 words); (3) "Omarius Hines to try his hand at tight end", St. Petersburg Times, 8/13/10 (153 words); (4) "Omarius Hines, Trey Burton give UF a chance to be tricky", The Florida Times-Union, 8/22/12 (677 words); (5) "Florida Gators’ Omarius Hines is ‘a threat ... a weapon’,", The Miami Herald, 8/25/10 (533 words); (6) "Omarius Hines ready to show off his versatility with Gators", McClatchy-Tribune Regional News, 8/26/10 (471 words); (7) "Gators focus on new wild card Hines could become another playmaker who is hard to pin down", The Florida Times-Union, 8/27/10 (466 words); (8) "Gators to take advantage of Hines' versatility", The Gainesville Sun; (9) "Florida Gators' Omarius Hines more than tight end", The Miami Herald, 9/2/10 (503 words); (10) "Omarius Hines will take over for Chris Rainey", St. Petersburg Times, 9/5/10 (176 words); (11) "Florida TE Omarius Hines might get call to provide offensive spark", The Florida Times-Union, 10/17/10 (361 words); (12) "Florida Gator Omarius Hines ready to make up for lost time", Tampa Bay Times, 8/23/12; (13) "UF's versatile Hines", The Gainesville Sun, 8/27/12 (473 words); (14) "Hines, Corsicana native, is Gators' versatile weapon", McClatchy-Tribune Regional News, 9/6/12 (559 words, reprinted here); (15) "Versatile Hines hard to handle", The Gainesville Sun, 10/9/12 (269 words); (16) "Former Gators Frankie Hammond, Omarius Hines to play in All-Star game today", Tampa Bay Times, 1/11/13 (247 words). In addition, his abuse at the hands of the Florida coaching staff was a notable point in the 2018 expose of Urban Meyer found at (17) here. Cbl62 (talk) 07:10, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Delete This is one of those articles that falls into the grey area that we continue to talk about over and over again.
    WP:NGRIDIRON having failed to make it in professional football. Articles such as [1] and [2] are routine local sports reporting and don't really establish his notability as an athlete, even though his name is in the headline. Even with all of this it'd be difficult to squeeze much more than a stub out of this article. In my estimation this isn't quite as bad as some of the other ones that have been kept or no consensus-ed, Wikipedia tends to take a very narrow view of athletes who are only locally notable in other sports who don't pass the sport's SNG (for instance, I was recently a keep !voter in a basketball article which was deleted, and you'd be hard pressed to find a footy player on here who is both notable and hasn't played an AFL game.) I see no reason to make an exception here. SportingFlyer T·C 10:44, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • keep looks like a clear pass of
    WP:ROUTINE guideline.--Paul McDonald (talk) 12:52, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Keep. Meets
    WP:NGRIDIRON (see Wikipedia:Notability (sports)/FAQ Q3, for a definitive answer on this, i.e., if the subject meets the general notability guideline, then he/she meets Wikipedia's standards for having an article in Wikipedia, even if he/she does not meet the criteria for the appropriate sports-specific notability guideline. The sports-specific notability guidelines are not intended to set a higher bar for inclusion in Wikipedia). The fact that other sports projects ignore/misinterpret this is irrelevant. Ejgreen77 (talk) 16:25, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Weak keep: Generally, I would lean against keeping a page for a player who ended up totaling 2 touchdowns in his college career, and whose best season was finishing third in receiving yards on an 8-5 UF team. But he appears to meet GNG per his non-routine coverage in The Miami Herald and Tampa Bay Times, as well as his role in the Urban Meyer controversy. Ostealthy (talk) 16:47, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I haven't looked at the sources yet, but the arguments are deja vu of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kenneth Walker III, which I nominated and was closed as "no consensus" (unrelated, but he later received more coverage, enough IMO).—Bagumba (talk) 17:20, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep – subject passes
    WP:GNG per the significant coverage presented by Cbl62. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 13:35, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Speedy Keep
    ☎) 18:56, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply
    ]
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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Omarius_Hines&oldid=1086082038"