Jump to content

Talk:Tim Tebow/Archive 3

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4

American football player vs. American football player

American football articles typically gloss American football in the introductory sentence, rather than calling someone an "American football player". This was was the subject of a lengthy discussion at WP:NFL a while back; the gist of it was that just linking "football" is insufficient to disambiguate which sport is intended. While WP:MOSBIO recommends that an individual's nationality be included in the intro, that doesn't have precedence over the reason for their notability, which is their sports career. Every player good article I checked (Cato June, Mark Bavaro, Bob Chappuis, Joe Delaney, Tai Streets, Scott Zolak) do it this way.--Cúchullain t/c 17:25, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

I agree, it should state the sport (American football) rather than the nationality (American football). Eagles 24/7 (C) 19:45, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
Done.--Cúchullain t/c 13:25, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
Gentlemen, I will simply point out that this is inconsistent with how every other sport identifies their players by nationality, more or less consistently, and is also inconsistent with the WP-wide standard. I suggest we remember that Americans are not the only contributors to English Wikipedia, and not all athletes who play American sports are American citizens. Moreover, the disambiguation argument is somewhat disingenuous when the "American football/football" piped link leads directly to "American football." This is just one of several purported WP:NFL "standards" which are inconsistent with WP-wide standards, most of which are eliminated when NFL bios are critiqued during the GA or FA review processes. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 13:57, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
That last part isn't true: as I said, every American football biography GA that I checked does it this way. Of course Americans aren't the only ones who read Wikipedia, that's why we can't assume they'll know what we're talking about when we say someone plays "football", which means different things in different places. Tebow doesn't play soccer, Canadian football, or Aussie rules football after all, and the readers shouldn't have to click a link to see that. And since his athletic career is the thing he's notable for, it's more important to make that clear than to clarify what his nationality is.--Cúchullain t/c 14:45, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
The "last part" was a reference to WP:NFL's eccentric habit of including the birthplace in the lifespan parenthetical in the lead and several other non-standard formatting quirks. At one point, several WP:NFL editors and at least one administrator were deleting the persondata template from NFL bios; they seem to have more than their share of eccentricities. As for the actual piped link vs. nationality question, the same argument could be made with regard to virtually every WP bio. E.g., is it more noteworthy that Bill Gates founded Microsoft or that he is an American? Clearly, the former; however, the two discrete items of information are not incompatible. Perhaps the solution is to include some reference to "Smith is a native of Virginia," by way of example, which would at least permit us to put the subject NFL player in a national context without repeating the word "American" twice in visible text. Please note, in the better-written Canadian football bios, American players are identified as such. Many NBA and MLB players are not Americans. As for Tebow, his lead would require more subtle distinctions, such as "He is an American/United States citizen who was born in the Philipines to American missionary parents." Both purposes can be accomplished, with some creative solutions, if our administrators and better writers attempt to adhere to WP-wide standards. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 15:15, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
As you note, the difference between American football players and players of other sports (and indeed Bill Gates) is that in those cases the nationality does not clash with the name of the sport. There's no dissonance in saying "Derek Jeter is an American professional baseball player" or "Bill Gates is an American business magnate", but we can't very well say that "Tim Tebow is an American American football player." And unlike many other sports, the great majority of American football players have been Americans. This format isn't perfect, but I think it works as well as any other I've seen.
"American Canadian football player", and "Canadian American football player" (for the few that there have been), are not as problematic. If they played both I've seen them called an "American and Canadian football player" or an "American/Canadian gridiron football player" (I personally prefer the latter).
Tebow's birth in the Philippines is already discussed in the bio section; it doesn't need to be said in the introductory sentence. At any rate I don't think any of this is sport-wide issue is going to be resolved at the this one article.--Cúchullain t/c 16:10, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
May I suggest "an American player of Canadian football" or "an American player of gridiron football?" The construction "American Canadian football player" will probably leave most readers confused as to what sport the subject plays and whether his nationality is American or American-Canadian. English is a very flexible language, and in the hands of a skillful user, quite precise. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 16:22, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

crying photo

A couple of users keep trying to insert a (purposely) unflattering photo of Tebow on the sidelines during the 2009 SEC Championship Game. I recommend that he, er, I mean, they check out wikipedia's policy on photos in biographies of living persons, which explains why the photo is inappropriate. Also, let we add one more item to the "what wikipedia is not" list: wikipedia is not a college sports smack board. Thanks. Zeng8r (talk) 00:30, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

I have nominated the file for deletion (see Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2010 November 7#File:Tim-tebow-crying.jpg). Eagles 24/7 (C) 00:36, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Univoxone, 18 November 2010

{{edit semi-protected}} Tim Tebow's degree is in "Family, Youth and Community Sciences".. not "Services" I know this because I have the same degree from UF.

Univoxone (talk) 20:22, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

 Done Eagles 24/7 (C) 20:40, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Filipino America, or not?

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:List_of_Filipino_Americans#Tim_Tebow. RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 13:15, 5 March 2011 (UTC) (Using {{pls}})

94 Million People vs 94 Million Hits vs Most Searched Term

In the "Tebow Rule" section it mentions that '94 Million People' googled a verse after he wore it on his eyeblack. I checked the site used as reference- http://espn.go.com/blog/sportscenter/post/_/id/31088/tim-tebow-rules-according-to-the-ncaa - which says "94 million people" and links another site. This site - http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/sports_college_uf/2009/09/tebow-draws-more-attention-for-eyeblack-messages.html - says 94 Million hits. This is a huge distinction since obviously one hit does not necessarily mean one person. I'm highly dubious of the 94 million people figure since this would mean about a third of the US's population googled it. 82.0.16.12 (talk) 16:15, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

There are several reasons why this number is dubious. According to Nielson, only about 30 million people watched the BCS National Championship. So unless all 30 million people all told 3 of their friends to go search 3:16 and everyone did it, 90 million people and 90 million hits is way to high. 9.0 million is possible but not also not likely. This should probably be changed to unverrified reports. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joeb90 (talk • contribs) 09:18, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Maybe it should just say Millions of people — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joeb90 (talk • contribs) 09:24, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Within the article under subsection "The Tebow Rule" the following is listed "During his college football career, Tebow frequently wore references to biblical verses on his eye black. In the 2009 BCS Championship Game, he wore John 3:16 on his eye paint, and as a result, 92 million people searched "John 3:16" on Google during or shortly after the game." I'm extremely doubtful that there would be any definitive way to link search results of 92 million people to the actions of one man. The very statement itself is vague stating during or shortly after. How shortly after? An hour, a day, a week? This seems to be nothing more than bluster and there is no way in which it can be corroborated. This just seems like a silly claim to me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.217.31.183 (talk) 22:31, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
Yes, it seems like a large number, but it was reported by multiple news outlets all over the country, including the NY Times, USA Today, and many many others. You can't remove facts just because you personally think they're unlikely, especially facts with a half-dozen or more good references. That's just basic wikipolicy.
Anyway, I reworded the sentence to clarify timing concerns and to account for slightly different Google search estimates. Zeng8r (talk) 03:46, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
  • I moved up my comments from further down the page on this topic. Again, I understand what you're saying, Joeb90, but that number is well-sourced (over-sourced, actually) so that's what we have to go with. Zeng8r (talk) 11:37, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Zeng8r, thanks for being fair about this. 90 million is not as well sourced as it appears. The 87-91 references are not all consistent. The USA today article says that Tebow was TOLD 90 million people searched for the bible verse, not that the 90 million claim had been verified. The NY times article says that it was the most popular search on google that week, nothing about absolute numbers. The Christian Science Monitor, says 100 million, but it has questionable bias. The modesto bee article was written a year after the fact, and hardly has the verification resources of the NY times. The Boston Herald article is currently unavailable. So, the NY Times is the only article written within 6 months of the event, and they only felt comfortable saying that 3:16 was the most searched term that day. This 90 Million claim is weakly verifiable at best, urban legend at worst. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joeb90 (talk • contribs) 09:38, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

"Tim Tebow Rules! (According to the NCAA) - SportsCenter.com, currently ref #84, is another source, which itself has a link to another article which supports this as well. I had moved this out before due to WP:CITECLUTTER, but it can be added back. May I suggest removing Christian Science Monitor source if its independence is in question. We dont need this many sources. Also note that a source requiring a subscription, like the Boston Herald article, can still be reliable.—Bagumba (talk) 17:15, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

The ESPN article is also an interesting one, but it also has a hole in it. Looking at the ESPN article, it actually cites a blog post on the Orlando Sentinel as the source of the 94 million claim. There are 2 problems with this blog post. The blog post is an opinion article which does not go through the same editorial process as the NYTimes. 2. It is a blog post written by Jeremy Fowler who has had run-ins with the University of Florida and Urban Meyer. I would question it's independence. This 90 million claim needs to be scaled back to a more verifiable claim such as what the NYTimes chose which is "most searched term" with no absolute numbers. A simple link to the google trends on that day would validate this simpler claim. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joeb90 (talk • contribs) 23:30, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Lots of imprecise wording throughout the various sources does not make something true.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Joeb90 (talk • contribs) 08:34, 29 January 2012‎

It might be clearer if you provided a proposal for wording you would like changed along with suppporting excerpts from reliable sources.—Bagumba (talk) 08:53, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
I propose deleting the words "generating over 90 million searches" and leaving it as simlpy the most searched term on google. Suppporting excerpts from a reliable source include the NYTimes article "Tebow Returning to Florida for Final Year". A close read of the article shows that an absolute number of searches is never stated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joeb90 (talk • contribs) 06:48, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
As you well know since you've been beating this same deceased horse for weeks, there were a half-dozen (or more) citations from good sources for the "over 90 million" number at one point. Some were removed per WP:CITECLUTTER because all those little numbers made the text hard to read. Should we put them all back?
Again, you can't remove well-sourced facts just because you personally think they're unlikely. Zeng8r (talk) 11:12, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

NFL Magazine

It was just announced that Tebow will appear on the front cover for the first issue of NFL Magazine. Where in the article do we want to add this? Even maybe in the main paragraphs? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.88.97.42 (talk) 01:49, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

I think we also might need to find a reliable image of the front cover. 74.88.97.42 (talk) 23:31, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Left handed

It's unusual for a quarterback to be left handed. My note on this was deleted here. Perhaps that's not the right spot but it's notable and should be in the article.Americasroof (talk) 16:22, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

It's now in the article. Thank you.Americasroof (talk) 16:24, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
It's now been moved from the lede because it does not belong there. The lede should contain a brief statement of the reasons for the subject person's notability, and include a summary of the article's major points. The lede is not the proper place to include trivia about his lefthandedness, any more than it is the proper place to state his eye color. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 16:28, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Tebowing

Tebowing is NOT a neologism...it does not meet the definition, please remove that. Also, should it be mentioned that it is disparaging in nature? The way it is written now gives the impressoin that they are mimicking him out of adoration, not mocking him in derision. 152.131.9.132 (talk) 18:14, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

  • "A neologism is a newly coined term, word, or phrase, that may be in the process of entering common use, but has not yet been accepted into mainstream language." I think Tebowing meets that definition. No comment on the rest of your point. --B (talk) 19:16, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
  • Here's a relevant link from today's Wall Street Journal: [1]. I won't try to speak for all of Tebow's detractors, but the guy who coined the phrase "tebowing," Jared Kleinstein, clearly intended for the term to have a positive connotation, even if he was having some fun with it. FYI, Kleinstein is a Jew who admires Tebow for his public expressions of faith. That sounds pretty positive, in a very ecumenical sort of way. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 20:31, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

The sub-section on 'Tebowing' looks good enough to me, (the world 'neologism' is not known to most WP readers but they can assume what it might mean, and to suggest differently, please suggest a different term), but the verb and action has become a worldwide social phenomenon and Tebowing deserves its own WP page! . . .Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 06:29, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

It would need enough sources to pass WP:GNG and WP:NEO.—Bagumba (talk) 06:36, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
It's a fad that will probably fade in the offseason, so I don't think that a separate article is warranted. Redirecting to the relevant section in this article is still appropriate, imo. Zeng8r (talk) 14:41, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
I agree it is good to wait and see (about a separate article), BUT I see a movement that is not related entirely to QB Tim Tebow. It reflects a return to faith and prayer in America. You may not understand that, but many of us do, including more than his many fans. Let's see how it continues. 'Tebowing' may prove popular only in football season. Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 15:44, 23 January 2012 (UTC) . . .
PS: Further, it has more reader interest than many WP articles, including, perhaps, Tim Tebow's. . . . We'll see. And what about historical reasons? Why wait? Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 15:46, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
Popularity is not a reason to keep or delete.—Bagumba (talk)

18:20, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Notability is not temporary. Namely, "it does not need to have ongoing coverage." However, is there consensus that it "has been the subject of significant coverage" already per GNG. Another article or two that discusses its impact would help. If it was deemed already notable, it wouldnt matter if it died today.—Bagumba (talk) 18:10, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
Yes, that's all true. However, I don't see what more could be said about Tebowing that would justify moving back to a separate article. It would need some context and history, all of which would be redundant to this article. Besides that, it would become a hard-to-maintain collection of pop culture references, trivia, and general cruft, none of which make for a good wiki-entry. It's best to leave it as a redirect to a Tebowing section in the main Tim Tebow article, imo, so that interested visitors can learn about the term and its origin with one click and a bit of scrolling. Zeng8r (talk) 19:30, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

February 3, 2012 . . . Interest in Tebow and Tebowing continues: [2] reports a poll where if a top quarterback were president, Tebow wins the poll. Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 03:11, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

The source wouldnt count toward meeting WP:GNG for a standalone article as it's a trivial mention IMO.—Bagumba (talk) 05:25, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 12 December 2011

He was the first underclassman to have ever won the Heisman Trophy.[19] This line should be deleted. Please look at the reference at http://www.heisman.com/index.php/heismanWinners For example, two time winner Archie Griffin is the most obvious evidence and argument to delete the above line.. Kobetiha (talk) 23:55, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

In collegiate sports, the term "underclassman" signifies a freshman or sophomore in eligibility. Tebow was indeed the first underclassman to win the award. (Oddly enough, he started a streak of 3 straight sophomores winning the Heisman. He was still the first, though.) Zeng8r (talk) 00:06, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
Actually, Griffin was a junior and a senior when he won the Heisman. Juniors and seniors are usually considered "upperclassmen," and freshmen and sophomores are usually referred to as "underclassmen." Tebow was the first sophomore to win the Heisman. Fir the sake of clarity, I will change the phrase from "first underclassment" to "first sophomore" to win the Heisman. Cheers. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 00:09, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
I think it was better before. Saying "first sophomore" implies that a freshman had already won a Heisman when that has not happened at all yet. Using "underclassman" covers both classifications. Zeng8r (talk) 01:02, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
Okay. That works, too, Zen. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 02:49, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
So why is the Article back to "sophomore" ? . . . Hmmmm? ... 69.108.137.151 (talk) 15:32, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Homeschooling Movement

In this section, it says "New York Jets Defensive End Jason Taylor" and he now plays for the Dolphins. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.62.164.220 (talk) 00:29, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Ridiculously long entry

Johnny Unitas' Wikipedia entry isn't this long or detailed. Let's put this guy into perspective: he's a second-year QB, hasn't set any NFL records or been elected to the Hall of Fame. Unitas was one of the best who ever played. This entry is ridiculously long and tedious. Seriously - each year of his college career needs at least six paragraphs? This entry could be slashed in half. Sd31263 (talk) 23:21, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

The answer here is notability. Tebow is notable and folks want to hear about him. I like football, but do not care for the broncos and wanted to find other info about Tebow. I have not read Unitas' wiki page and do not know about his fath, but this is something Tebow is noted for. If he were hurt tomorrow and could no longer play football, Tebow is the type of person that would continue to set an example with his faith. His notoriety serves as an example to others. There may be better exaples of faith and good acts out there, but right now Tebow is the most notable. The most any of us can do is try our best with the talent God gives us. Tebow isn't even the best QB or football player and that is not the point here. Football is very insignificant. This isn't even about Tim Tebow, but rather his example and the glory of God shown through him. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.116.212.32 (talk) 18:52, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

The unsigned response is invalid. This is an online encyclopedia, this article is far too long for one person that has actually had very little impact on the world stage. Some 0.1% of the world population (some football fans, gator fans, and christians) thinks he is great. The college career is over stated severely. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.231.117.36 (talk) 16:16, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Yeah I agree. Personally, I think he's way overhyped, and the opening section fawns the sh!t out of him. The dinks 18 (talk) 20:33, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Fat Head

The last paragraph of the page links to Fat Head the movie, not to the stylized adhesive company. Just sayin'...

Change it to point to the correct thing or remove the link. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.25.200.107 (talk) 01:28, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

 Fixed --‖ Ebyabe talk - Inspector General ‖ 01:33, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

edit request: People.com article with his former lab partner saying he believes in evolution.

I'm not sure on whether this is appropriate but considering his growing stature among christians this article seems significant.

http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20555024,00.html

He says that Tebow believes in "microevolution" Possibly could be added in the "In The Media" section? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Esw116 (talk • contribs) 03:17, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

I don't think this is particularly important. The memories of a football player's former biology lab partner regarding Tim Tebow's supposed beliefs about such a topic isn't really important to this article. --Jayron32 05:18, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Article quality

Is "skillset" a word? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.206.234.117 (talk) 23:36, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Yes, according to Wiktionary and Oxford and several other dictionaries, though several prefer to put a space in the middle, and spell it "skill set". You are allowed to fix any errors you find. --Jayron32 00:21, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Tebow's personal names

Question: Is Tebow named for Timothy Richard, the 19th-century Baptist missionary to China? Thanks. --Dawud — Preceding unsigned comment added by 111.240.168.121 (talk) 02:53, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Latest edits

There have been a lot of edits and additions to this article over the past couple of days, but imho, pretty much all of the new text needs cleanup if its going to stay, and some of it really should be cut.

To wit, Tebow's philanthropic pursuits are certainly notable enough for inclusion. However, the tone of that new section is far too promotional and peacock-y, to the point that somebody might feel the urge to remove it altogether. Also, some editors have caught a bad case of "recentism-itis" and feel the need to add every trivial quote, event, or youtube video that has anything to do with Tebow. It seems to be well-intentioned, but most (if not all) of it doesn't really belong in a Wikipedia article.

I won't have time to work on anything until tomorrow, so perhaps one of the many excellent editors who have this article watchlisted could take care of these issues sooner than that?... Zeng8r (talk) 01:34, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 14 January 2012

The second to last sentence of the second paragraph, under the section titled "Early Years" reads:

"Tebow's preferred position was quarterback, but Trinity football team's offense did not rely on passing the football, so he moved into an apartment in nearby St. Johns County, making him eligible to play for the pass-oriented offence at Nease."

The word "offense" is misspelled as "offence"

Ryanfinnegan (talk) 15:30, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

 Done Thanks! It's British English spelling, but he's an American and American English is used throughout (including many uses of 'offense'). Dru of Id (talk) 16:06, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 15 January 2012

Please change to "construct" a hospital, not "contruct" a hospital" under Philanthropic Work 75.107.64.56 (talk) 04:14, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Done. Thanks for noticing and notifying. Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 05:06, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 21 January 2012

Create a section about "Tebowing". This term is used to describe Tim Tebow getting on one knee during key situations in a game. The term Tebow has become a verb, meaning 'to tebow' and has gained National Attention.

JaceAlbin (talk) 23:02, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Already done: Tim_Tebow#Tebowing Zeng8r (talk) 23:39, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
Note that the small orange box at the very top of this talk page explains that the term already redirects to the article, and provides a link to the discussion where the term was deleted as a separate article. Dru of Id (talk) 23:45, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 23 January 2012

I have uploaded the photo to the commons. I would like to add it to the following page, http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Tim_Tebow and placed at the top of the "Tebowing" paragraph. The Commons location is

File:Tebowing.jpg
Tebowing

Clemed (talk) 04:19, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

This is good; looks like 'Tebowing' includes a brief thoughtful prayer. Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 05:31, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

That's an excellent shot, but watermarked images are not usually allowed in the Commons, and they're almost never allowed on Wikipedia's servers. You can read the relevant policies here (Wikicommons) and here (Wikipedia). I'd hate to add the photo to the article only to have it deleted later.Zeng8r (talk) 11:23, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

I will remove my watermark and re-upload it to the commons. Ill let you know when I am done. - Thanks

We can use the photo, but it should be noted in a caption that Tebowing typically implies placing head on hand as well.—Bagumba (talk) 17:59, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Photos for Tebow Page

I made the mistake of uploading the Tebowing photo with my company signature, I have now corrected that. I have uploaded the photo to the commons as well as another photo of Tim. I took both photos at the Denver vs KC game on 1/1/12. I would like to add both photos to the Tim Tebow page. The photo of Tim “Tebowing” should go to the top of the Tebowing paragraph. The photo of Tim throwing the ball would be a great profile page photo. I understand the page already has a profile photo but this one is more current. File:PNS 2707.jpg File:Tim Tebow Tebowing.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clemed (talk • contribs) 04:26, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

I recieved a message about a permissions error on the two photos. Below is a copy of the email that I sent to :permissions-commons@wikimedia.org I hereby affirm that I, Ed Clemente is the creator and/or sole owner of the exclusive copyright of [Photo of Tim Tebow Tebowing and Photo of Tim throwing in pregame warmups. File:PNS 2707.jpg and File:Tim Tebow Tebowing.jpg I agree to STANDARD CHOICE; SEE BELOW FOR MORE INFORMATION ON TYPE OF LICENSE: [publish that work under the free license "Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0" (unported) and GNU Free Documentation License (unversioned, with no invariant sections, front-cover texts, or back-cover texts).] I acknowledge that by doing so I grant anyone the right to use the work in a commercial product or otherwise, and to modify it according to their needs, provided that they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws. I am aware that this agreement is not limited to Wikipedia or related sites. I am aware that I always retain copyright of my work, and retain the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be claimed to have been made by me. I am aware that the free license only concerns copyright, and I reserve the option to take action against anyone who uses this work in a libelous way, or in violation of personality rights, trademark restrictions, etc. I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the work may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project. [Ed Clemente of Ed Clemente Photography.com [SENDER'S AUTHORITY (copyright-holder)] 1/24/12 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clemed (talk • contribs) 04:54, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Those are excellent shots; thanks for your contributions! I'll insert them in appropriate places. Zeng8r (talk) 13:50, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank You! --Ed Clemente Photography 16:16, 25 January 2012 (UTC)


The photo File:Tim Tebow Tebowing.jpg , is not actually of him Tebowing... There should be a picture of him in the same position with his head on his fist. It looks like this picture was taken just before or just after that part of the act. I've only ever done minor edits and never changed a picture/I'm not sure how to even do that/ I don't have one that I'm confident meets the commons requirements. So, I think it would be great if someone who was able to do that corrected it.Fjf1085 (talk) 16:46, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Examples of Media References and Parody:

Tebow Steak example.com/link_1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dudleyz03 (talk • contribs) 04:10, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Philanthropy section

Many non-believers, like me, do not consider spread of religion a positive thing in the world. The part where he "assisted in medical care" is one thing, but the next sentence—"In the United States, he has shared his Christian faith in prisons and schools, to church and youth groups, and at meetings and conferences"—says absolutely nothing positive. To people like myself, that sentence simply says he's trying to poison the minds of the young or encourage poisoning of the minds of the young.

I'm not saying he's not doing good, but in my opinion, the stuff that's about spreading religion and faith does not belong in a philanthropy section. DarkPhoenix (talk) 06:44, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

I wholeheartedly agree. Preaching one's religion is not an inherently philanthropic act, just like campaigning for your Congressman does not constitute a charitable act.

Since nearly a month went by without anybody disputing what you said here, it appears as though we have a consensus on this; therefore, I went ahead and moved "Evangelism" to its own section.

Things like giving medical aid to children still need to be removed from the Evangelism section and placed under Philanthropy, but I'm at work right now so somebody else can handle that part. =) Sir kris (talk) 00:55, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Circumcision is not 'medical care' - it's a cultural and religious rite with no proven medical benefit. Ianbrettcooper (talk) 17:01, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

couldn't agree with you more, on all the points above.rich (talk) 17:28, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 20 March 2012

Tebow is no longer the starter for the Broncos, due to their acquisition of Peyton Manning. Please remove the 'starting' qualifier at the beginning of the article describing his current role with the team:

"...currently the starting quarterback for the Denver Broncos of the National Football League (NFL)."

should become:

"...currently a quarterback for the Denver Broncos of the National Football League (NFL)."

72.37.244.76 (talk) 22:45, 20 March 2012 (UTC)


There definitely will need to be some changes to the article, but with the wheel still spinning on possible trade deals, maybe we should wait a few days to see how things settle out. You would think that Tebow will be moved soon. Zeng8r (talk) 23:01, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

New York Jets

According to Jay Glazer, Tim Tebow has been traded to the New York Jets in exchange for a Fourth-Round Draft Pick in an as of yet unspecified draft (likely 2012) --Boston Burkenation (talk) 17:10, 21 March 2012 (UTC)


The trade is not finalized!!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryanmarcantonio (talk • contribs) 19:41, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Correct. I will switch it back now. --Boston Burkenation (talk) 19:55, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
Yes, that trade is not final by any means so it's speculation at best. Remove the see also "List of New York Jets players", re-add the appropriate templates, fix the lead template and paragraph and remove the Jets categories and completely remove the Jets section. Revert to [3] this previous revision where all of that is removed. 24.129.38.231 (talk) 19:59, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
I'm all for being cautious, but it is done[4] (in addition to the reference that's already in the article). You are getting worked up over nothing. --Bongwarrior (talk) 20:09, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
Ah, my mistake. I see where you're coming from now, no objections. --Bongwarrior (talk) 20:11, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
(edit conflict)I removed it from the lead, as there appears to be a hangup in the deal.[5] Let's just leave it out, at least from the intro, until it's sorted.--Cúchullain t/c 20:12, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
This is why we should wait for official team announcements not sports blogs as sources for these kind of deals. Karl 334 ☞Talk ☜ 20:16, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

http://espn.go.com/new-york/nfl/story/_/id/7718133/tim-tebow-trade-hits-snag-contract-language-source-says

Per ESPN (above); trade's not official, Broncos and Jets now disagreeing on who's responsible for 5mm in future salary paid to Tebow. --Madchester (talk) 20:21, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

As I commented yesterday, in fluid situations like this, it's best to wait to change an article until things settle themselves out. Notwithstanding the eagerness of editors trying to be helpful, Wikipedia isn't a breaking news site. Zeng8r (talk) 23:49, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Trade becomes official Saturday!

Due to contract language, and other procedural things, Tebow is a Bronco until Saturday. It's all sourced right here in this article: http://espn.go.com/new-york/nfl/story/_/id/7725082/procedural-issue-delays-tim-tebow-trade-new-york-jets-saturday

Fur further reading, he is also listed on the Broncos roster: http://www.nfl.com/teams/denverbroncos/roster?team=DEN

And last but not least, WP:Crystal

Kjscotte34 (talk) 11:14, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

NCCA QB Rating

I was looking into the NCCA QB Ratings, and in the Tim Tebow post it claims that he had a QB Rating of 176. This is false as his QB rating is only 172.73340101522842 or 172.7. It is also inconsistent to have him be rated at 176 when the highest NCCA belongs to Sam Bradford at 175.6. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kevin Sivadas (talk • contribs) 14:53, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

The official NCAA record book (p. 29 in this PDF) actually lists the number as 170.8, which is indeed an SEC record and 2nd to Bradford's NCAA record. Thanks, I'll fix it. Zeng8r (talk) 15:43, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Tim Tebow's biggest fan

A message from the Almighty was delivered Friday at the funeral of Russell Francis, the Jets superfan who predicted on his death bed that Tim Tebow would join Gang Green.

“God told me to tell everyone here that Russell was on the winning side,” said the Rev. Mark Taylor at the Open Door Church in Brooklyn.

Before succumbing to lung cancer last Saturday, Francis peered into the future and declared that Tebow, the righteous but left-handed NFL quarterback, would soon be a Jet.

Francis, who was 44, did not live long enough to see his prediction come true.

But Francis knew, the preacher told his flock, that Tebow has what it takes to lead Gang Green to football’s Promised Land, the Super Bowl.


Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/jets-fan-predicted-deathbed-tebow-coming-memorialized-brooklyn-article-1.1049903#ixzz1q3ffJVXT — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.119.161.19 (talk) 16:58, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Tebow Notoriaty

This article is larger and more complete than the Margaret Thatcher article. Is this really appropriate? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.60.103.174 (talk) 16:14, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

It's a reflection of the interest of the volunteer editors. It wouldn't be appropriate to intentionally make it incomplete at this point.—Bagumba (talk) 16:19, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
What Bagumba said. The ultimate goal of the Wikipedia project is to make every article as complete and informative as possible. When you see other entries in need of assistance, please pitch in! There are a few million incomplete articles to choose from. Zeng8r (talk) 16:51, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Last sentence of first paragraph

"Commenting on Tebow's play and the attention he has garnered, many football players and observers have said that they 'have never seen anything like it.' "

I think this sentence could use a tweaking. Nothing has really been all that special about his play, it's been mediocre at best. The only thing that is unprecedented about Tebow is the attention. 76.27.139.167 (talk) 15:58, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

<Exasperated sigh> The manner in which he and the Broncos won games was something that people had never seen before, you could say that. -- The Writer 2.0 Talk 22:13, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Dyslexia

Maybe someone with editing power could add that he suffers from dyslexia. some sources - [6] and [7] Thank you. 72.152.138.243 (talk) 19:50, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Introduction minor edit

I thought the sentence:

'With his unorthodox NFL quarterback skills, frequent demonstrations of his religious devotion, and his team's success, Commenting on Tebow's play and the attention he has garnered, many football players and observers have said that they "have never seen anything like it."'

is a bit unclear. Also "Commenting" should not be capitalized. I'd fix it myself but as this a protected page... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.215.5.255 (talk) 14:53, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Agreed, 129. I cleaned up that portion of the lede. Thanks for the note; I hope this is sorta what you had in mind.Moishe Rosenbaum (talk) 15:18, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

"Muscular Christianity"?

An editor has deleted the clause noting that Tebow "is known for exemplifying what has been called "Muscular Christianity", with the explanation, "Sharing one's faith is something all Christians do; it's not muscular Christianity -- see the article on muscular C. for its meaning." [8] I understand (and to some extent agree with) the editor's reasoning, but the fact remains that Tebow has been identified with "muscular Christianity" in numerous reliable sources.[9] See, for example, "Jeremy Lin, Tim Tebow, Josh Hamilton: Muscular Christianity's Newest Heroes", Christianity Today, March 22, 2012. Can we work toward an acceptable wording to acknowledge this? --Arxiloxos (talk) 17:32, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

I read the article, as the other editor suggested, and I think "Muscular Christianity" applies here. I say leave it in. Kjscotte34 (talk) 20:56, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
The definition of M.C.; quoting from the article is: "Christian commitment to piety and physical health". However the sentence on the introduction stated: "Tim Tebow exemplifies M.C. by sharing his faith in schools, hospitals, ..." which is not what M.C. is. Sharing one's faith is done by all Christians. If it were written "Tim ... exemplifies M.C. by his commitment to piety and physical health." that would be more right. But in it's present form it's best to omit the term M.C. from the introduction unless the sentence is reworded in some such manner.
It is true that as some 3rd party source says, he exemplifies M.C. to some limited extend -- but not because he shares his faith with others, but because of his simultaneous active commitment to the gospel and to physical well-being. I however don't think this aspect is that important. Tim has never ever referred to himself as a "Muscular Christian" and the label was applied onto him by other sources.
I personally hate the term because anyone reading the article will come across this sentence in it: "By 1901, muscular Christianity was influential enough in England that one author could praise "the Englishman going through the world with rifle in one hand and Bible in the other" and add, "If asked what our muscular Christianity has done, we point to the British Empire.""
That certainly draws a poor picture of a Christian, which I can say (bringing my own opinion here:) does not represent the majority of Christians. I wouldn't be surprised if the term M.C. was put in there by someone purposely attempting to draw Christians (or Tim Tebow's Christianity) in a negative light. One need not speculate on what kind of a (negative) opinion would be formed by a reader unfamiliar with the term (like myself) looking it up after coming across it on Tim's article. If they're unfamiliar with Christianity, probably a bad one. This is a BLP so I think I'm justified in having this concern. If someone really wants to put that term back in the article, they should explain why it is important to the article and how it describes Tim Tebow's faith accurately (I do not think the term M.C. describes his faith properly - the core definition "well-being and piety" and aspects of it might, but the connotations it carries do not.) Arjun G. Menon (talk · mail) 15:29, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Consensus on Height

​ Tim Tebow's height is 6'3 as verified on Tim Tebow's website Timtebow.com, Nfl.com,ESPN,NY Jetswebsite etc. Originally 6'3 was posted in his bio portion on Wikipedia and has been recently changed incorrectly to 6'2. Username medicalkiki

See Sondra Locke. Four sources have two years for birth. I tried to add both but this infobox would not allow it. You may wish to email the only source that says 2 inches and see if they will match the other sources. Team and BLP website may not carry the weight of the independant source. That may be why it shows 2. 6' 2" source You may want to seek input from others as well to seek consensus.

 Not done--Canoe1967 (talk) 08:25, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

It is the consensus policy of WP:NFL to use the height and weight of players given on NFL.com and they say 3 inches.
Resolved

--Canoe1967 (talk) 10:47, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Mother's pregnancy/early life

The portion of Tim Tebow's page which references his mother's pregnancy complication and infection is not clear as to whether this is when she was pregnant with Tim or one of his siblings- I think that's an important clarification to be made. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.79.64.194 (talk) 00:37, 9 November 2012 (UTC)



Opting out of Wildcat Controversy

Think this needs to be looked at and modified:

″After finding out that McElroy passed him on the depth chart, Tebow asked to not be a part of the Jets wildcat formation, and was replaced by Jeremy Kerley.[137]″


This was a claim made by 2 reporters in a joint article. Tebow was asked about it and denied that it happened. Said that it might have been a misunderstanding

"Tebow Says He Never Asked to Be Held Out of Wildcat" http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/27/sports/football/nfl-roundup.html?_r=0
Jets quarterback Tim Tebow insisted Wednesday that he did not ask out of running Wildcat plays last week, but he acknowledged that what he said to Coach Rex Ryan might have been misinterpreted as such. "I never said, Hey, I don’t do anything, or I won’t do anything,” Tebow said. “That wasn’t the talk at all. He knows that, and everybody on this team knows that.



Thanks ! Demosthenes9 (talk) 07:09, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

I concur -- the "sources" for this article were not named, and it is a factual point which turns on the wording of the conversation, which was admittedly a heated exchange. Neither participant in the conversation, Rex Ryan nor Tebow, confirmed the wording that he "asked out." It appears the conversation was more of an "It's everything or nothing!" fight -- i.e., that Tebow expressed that he must be considered a "regular quarterback." Rex Ryan confirmed that Tebow was willing to do anything asked of him. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.15.169.100 (talk) 18:32, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

The issue has been clarified. Gunbirddriver (talk) 22:33, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Tebowing

"After two and a half-months" shouldn't have a dash between half and months. 174.89.29.173 (talk) 13:55, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

You're correct. That's an oversight. It's fixed.
Now, what I'm wondering about is: in the 2nd half of that sentence it says, "from all seven continents." Are there people living on Antarctica? Or do penguins have internet access? --Musdan77 (talk) 04:06, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
Removed it. Would be cool to see a penguin Tebowing though. ZappaOMati 04:13, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Lead length

Is it just me, or is that lead inappropriately long? It's bigger than many stub articles, and even some start class ones! Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 14:44, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Doesn't look too long to me. There's a sentence or two in excess that could be removed, but leads for long articles are supposed to be longer, and this one does not seem out of proportion to the article itself. I'll remove a little bit of the excessive detail in a few places, but really, it's not too long. A lead is supposed to be like a little stand alone article that summarizes the topic fully. --Jayron32 14:55, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
I wholeheartedly agree with Luke's comment: the lead section was too long. The article has suffered from having a lead that tried to recount every detail of the kid's career. That's not necessary or even appropriate. The lead should be a representative summary of the article, not a retelling of every element of an already overly-detailed article. Sometimes, less is more.
Following up on Jayron's scalpel work, I have removed various unnecessary details while preserving what I believe is a coherent summary of the article and the subject's career. I have also deleted numerous low-value links that made the previous version of the lead section look like an Easter egg and made it difficult to read. Not every available link needs to be added to every article; emphasis should be placed on the most relevant high-value links, say like Heisman Trophy and BCS National Championship, not random low-value links to NCAA college football seasons.
In any event, the lead section is now about 40% shorter than it was, and I don't think anything essential has been sacrificed. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 16:10, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
  • I'll admit to being completely ignorant of the standard procedures for NFL players, I simply wandered here, having seen a few Sky Sports articles about him being fired, and his future. It does look a hell of a lot better now, (also, going from my 1366x768 laptop to my 1920x1080 desktop helps!) I didn't want to sort it myself as I would undoubtedly mess it up, being an NFL noob. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 19:12, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Patriots edit premature?

Unless you're seeing sources that are more up-to-date, as of 10 pm EDT Monday, it doesn't look like the Patriots deal is done: http://espn.go.com/boston/nfl/story/_/id/9362801/tim-tebow-sign-new-england-patriots-sources-say

Operative phrases here are "New England Patriots will sign Tim Tebow" (emphasis mine) and "Patriots spokesman Stacey James would not confirm Tebow had already signed when contacted Monday by The Associated Press, saying he did not 'anticipate any additional transactions to announce tonight'". I believe WP:V and WP:CRYSTAL apply here, and he should remain a free agent until the Pats send out a press release. 02:32, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Agreed; there's no rush (ha!). And if the signing does get confirmed, I'd be careful not to state a position of quarterback until that is confirmed as well. Regards, Orange Suede Sofa (talk) 02:53, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
I don't know if it's official now, but this said that the NFL confirmed the signing. ZappaOMati 03:38, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
The sportswriter at the New York Times is reporting that Tim Tebow has signed with the New England Patriots: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/11/sports/football/tim-tebow-finds-new-home-with-new-england-patriots.html?_r=0 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wodiamond (talk • contribs)

2012 Madden Bowl Win as the Clutch Team

There should be a section on the 2012 Madden Bowl which he won along with Drew Brees and Jimmy Graham as the Clutch Team.: http://www.gameinformer.com/b/news/archive/2012/02/03/brees-graham-and-tebow-win-madden-bowl-xviii.aspx https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Madden_NFL#Madden_Bowl

I wholeheartedly disagree. This is a trivial fact. If he's on the cover of Madden, that's one thing but it's rather irresponsible to dedicate an entire section to a piece of information that is not vital when it comes to knowing Tim Tebow. I would suggest that if there is a consensus to include the information, it should be worked into the article somewhere (in passing mention fashion) not given its own section. -- The Writer 2.0 Talk 02:55, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Abortion

Why is Pam Tebow's dubious claim that she was advised to have an abortion (despite being in a country where even giving said advice would be enough to get the doctor a 6-year prison term) being uncritically cited in this article? It's not like there's a lack of commentary to cite that questions her claim.[10][11][12][13] - 24.214.230.66 (talk) 21:33, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Because Wikipedia has a conservative bias? 75.76.213.161 (talk) 04:23, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

"Former"?

At what point does a non-playing player with no contract become a "former American football quarterback"? I don't want to insert the word and start an editing conflict... PaulCHebert (talk) 15:10, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

I think we use "former" once a player officially announces his retirement. ZappaOMati 15:19, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Christianity

Reading this article now, after Tebow is no longer in the NFL, hits home the point that his fame is significantly if not primarily due to his faith. I strongly believe that rather than a footnote in the leader, his faith should be in the first sentence - e.g. 'an American football player noted for his outspoken Christian faith' or similar. The renown in which he is held, his media coverage, and the length of his wikipedia article are just as dependent on his magnetic faith as they are on his short lived professional football career. Kirkbroadhurst (talk) 21:04, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

This is supposed to be a neutral article, so using the clunky and amateurish expression "his Christian faith" seems inappropriate. He's not getting an article about him for his "faith," but because he's a football player whose religious beliefs have made him popular with some Christian fundamentalist fans. I think "beliefs" or even "behavior" is a better choice than an outdated and charged word like "faith.". Makes wiki sound like some sort of chatauqua meeting. NaySay (talk) 02:19, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Broadcasting section

In the "Broadcasting" subsection in its last sentence i.e.: "It can be assumed this also attributed to his guest appearance.[166][167][168][169][170]", to make sense, the word "attributed" should be "contributed" as used. (Also, the sentence itself seems to be fluff.)Garshepp (talk) 15:24, 2 February 2014 (UTC)



Edit request

Opening paragraph fails WP:RELTIME. An encyclopedia is not news and phrases like "currently" should be avoided. An encyclopedia should say when, at the very least the word "currently" should be deleted. This is basic writing (and even if this was a newspaper it is still bad writing style to use vague time words, like now, recent, current) -- 109.76.233.207 (talk) 13:32, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 March 2014

Retirement update: Tim Tebow has not made an official statement regarding retirement. He continues his pursuit of becoming an NFL quarterback with continued training. He has been hired by ESPN as a college football analyst with an option to pursue the NFL. JoeyAlvarez63 (talk) 17:23, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Cannolis (talk) 21:52, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 February 2015

Add [NFL Rookie of the Week Award for Week 10] and [NFL Rookie of the Week Award for Week 16] under Tim Tebow NFL awards Supporting information - [ https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Pepsi_NFL_Rookie_of_the_Week#2010_winners ] Littlebit123 (talk) 05:10, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Not done for now: Apparently there is no consensus to make the change as it stands or the request wasn't clear enough either in what needed to be replaced, what the replacement text should be, or why it is beneficial to the encyclopedia to make the change as requested. Feel free to reopen this request when all of the criteria have been met. Thank you, — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 21:23, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

New Section on working with NFL Eagles (tbd)

Obviously, there will be high reader-interest in how this works out. 

Headline-1: "Glazer: Eagles plan to sign QB Tim Tebow"

QUOTE: " The Philadelphia Eagles plan to bring in quarterback Tim Tebow and sign him Monday as they begin their offseason program, FOX Sports NFL insider Jay Glazer reports." -- Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 02:36, 20 April 2015 (UTC) -- PS: Another ref for later consideration.

The new section is already in: Section 4.5 Tim_Tebow#Philadelphia_Eagles ready for good content. -- AstroU (talk) 02:48, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 April 2015

Tim Tebow has officially signed a 1 year contract with the Philadelphia Eagles as of 4/20/15 https://twitter.com/Eagles/status/590240729982574593 ItzMirage (talk) 20:08, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Already done --ElHef (Meep?) 01:49, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 April 2015

Liquidmuse3 (talk) 21:31, 20 April 2015 (UTC) The NFL stats page has Tebow starting 16 regular season games. The starts above "16" are 11 starts in one year, & 3 in another---14 regular season starts. He started 2 playoff games, bringing the total total to 16. Right now, you have it as 18.

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 13:37, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
I see what you mean. Math is hard sometimes. Done --ElHef (Meep?) 01:54, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

Retired or not?

The article says "Tebow retired from professional football on December 30, 2013", but the citation used quoted Tebow as saying "I continue to pursue my dream of playing quarterback in the NFL". Is there a better source for his retirement? Otherwise, sounds like he is more unemployed as a football player as opposed to having retired from playing.—Bagumba (talk) 00:43, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

I believe he is considered a free agent and hasn't filed retirement with the league --Conor Fallon (talk) 23:11, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for a good article--as he persues other 'professional' interests, i.e., broadcasting (as in the article). So he is not 'retired' in life, but he is retired as a pro-NFL-quarterback. IMO, AstroU (talk) 15:41, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Dating, and NOT dating

He went to the same church as Miss USA / Miss Universe, Olivia Culpo, but it turns out they never dated. Who would start the rumor everyone heard in media, and why?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-3340460/Olivia-Culp-Tim-Tebow-didn-t-sex-NEVER-dated-begin-following-reports-split-chastity-vow.html

AstroU (talk) 01:55, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

If this aspect of his personal life interests you (for furture editing) then this longer positive article is excellent:

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2015/12/01/bravo-tim-tebow.html?intcmp=hpff -- AstroU (talk) 04:48, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Tim Tebow. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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 IITalk to my owner:Online 15:55, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Tim Tebow. 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, 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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 IITalk to my owner:Online 23:15, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

High School

The paragraph about his being home-schooled but playing football for a public school is garbled. It says he took advantage of the law allowing this when he attended Trinity Christian Academy. But that is not home schooling, and as its name suggests, TCA is not, contrary to the article, a public school. It is a private Christian school. Then it says he played for what actually is a public high school, but doesn't make clear whether at that point he was home-schooled.Bill (talk) 06:01, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

From my reading if it, I think that he was being homeschooled but played football at Trinity Christian Academy then later deiceded to play at Nease while still being homeschooled. Also, what do you mean by it's not homeshcooling. It doesn't say he attended classes at Trinity. It says he played football there. WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 15:45, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
It does say that he attended Trinity and refers to it as the local high school. I quote: "Tebow took advantage of this law when he decided to attend Trinity Christian Academy, the local high school."Bill (talk) 22:58, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 September 2016


In the introduction of Tim Tebow, the last sentence that is noted by footnote #14, states that "In 2016, Tebow announced he would pursue a career in professional basbeball[14]..."

Basbeball should be correct to baseball. Kageoni (talk) 17:46, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

 Done WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 18:06, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Article summary

The intro to this article is and has pov issues. There are at least three paragraphs that can just be scrapped. -IM — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.202.184.14 (talk) 13:16, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 30 external links on Tim Tebow. 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 22:13, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Tim Tebow. 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 17:27, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Tense

"Lead" should be "led" in the following sentence: "Despite his success with the Broncos—he compiled a record of 8–6 as a starting quarterback and [led] the team to the playoffs and a playoff win..." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:844:4100:392E:9E7:67A7:4479:5863 (talk) 02:53, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 October 2018

Tim Tebow's birthplace is Manila, Philippines, not Jacksonville, Florida. His family were missionaries in the Philippines until he was 3 years old, when they THEN moved to Florida. 24.253.111.87 (talk) 23:44, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

 Done That information was part of larger vandalism on this article, and has been reverted. Thanks for catching this. —KuyaBriBriTalk 13:57, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Tim_Tebow/Archive_3&oldid=1089601156"