Talk:Darragh Ennis

Reviewer Note

@Fanoflionking, KaitoNkmra23, and HyacinthBucket55: Previous attempts to get discussion on whether to accept this draft have been unsuccessful. The instructions for reviewers say that a draft should be accepted if the reviewer thinks that there is more than a 50% likelihood that the article will survive an AFD. I have no idea whether this draft, if accepted, will survive AFD. I am willing to accept it if the submitters recognize that it might be nominated for deletion, in which case they can argue to keep it on grounds of notability. Are the submitters ready for a possible deletion discussion, if I accept it and someone else nominates it for AFD? Robert McClenon (talk) 04:27, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Currently, I’m unsure on whether this article should be accepted yet or not; it is the reason why I have only moved this article once about a year ago and never else. Multiple other editors have submitted this article for submission without discussion, which I have not supported. We can see how it goes in terms of deletion nominations and move it but at the moment I’m unsure. KaitoNkmra23 (talk!) 04:49, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

User:KaitoNkmra23 - I am not sure whether you are advising accepting or declining this article. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:35, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

User:Ponyo - I see that the title Darragh Ennis is ECP-protected in mainspace due to disruptive editing by unregistered editors. The instructions for AFC reviewers are that a draft should be accepted if the reviewer thinks that there is a more than 50% likelihood that the article will survive AFD. As noted, I have no idea whether the article will survive AFD, but would prefer to have its status resolved by a community process rather than by continued slow-motion edit-warring. I will accept the draft unless otherwise advised, knowing that it may go to AFD. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:43, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

User:LukeWWF - For your information also. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:43, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

@Robert McClenon: As long as it's not yet another sock creation and you're satisfied with the sourcing etc., I have no issues with it being moved. Do you need me to lower the protection?-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:55, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

User:Ponyo - There is no need to lower the protection level at this point. If I accept it, I may then request to downgrade the protection to semi, but I would prefer to leave it at ECP for now. The current draft appears to be the work of regular editors, and I will check it further before I do anything more. Thank you. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:40, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

User:Ponyo - I've accepted the article. It appears that the ECP-protection is sticky, and so has been dragged along on the history thingy that I round-robin cycled into the draft position, and the article is ECP-protected also. That seems fine, just in case the sockpuppets come back. If any real editor who is not yet extended-confirmed wants to update it, they can either request to downgrade the protection then, or they can make an edit request. I think we are finished. Thank you. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:33, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

Birthday

Hello.

I have previously tried to update this page and remove Darragh’s date of birth, as he stated on his VERIFIED TikTok account that it isn’t his birthday and was “added by friends as a joke” and he “doesn’t like to share his birthday publicly”. It has been removed numerous times so I ask for you to take the time to look at the links and stop misleading readers into thinking that his birthday is 29/09.

Darragh’s voiced answer overrules any source you may have.

https://vm.tiktok.com/ZGd1c9YET/ https://vm.tiktok.com/ZGd1cD54L/ Harley2210 (talk) 14:52, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

To me (especially given what he says about not wanting his birthday known) this looks like it's an attempt to remove a sourced reference to his birthday. So no, what he says in his own voice doesn't necessarily "overrule" what a reliable source reports. Lard Almighty (talk) 15:13, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Suppose this can stay as a misleading page then. Thanks. 🤷‍♂️ Harley2210 (talk) 16:51, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Is MyLondon a reliable source? "reliable, independent, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy"? Really? Ian Dalziel (talk) 20:32, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

It's IPSO regulated and a member of the Trust Project. If Ennis has an issue with them publishing a wrong birthdate he could complain to IPSO. Lard Almighty (talk) 06:09, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

DOB

I must say, I am extremely unimpressed with some of the previous discussions on this page. WP:BLP is quite clear about using reliable sources to verify facts, and Ennis' date of birth has been incorrect for 5 years. This is the original diff which added the current, incorrect, DOB. Sourced to... an unknown episode of The Chase UK that was never cited. This was on 18 February 2021. The current source which is cited for the DOB was published on 2 August 2021. So this is a clear case of WP:CIRCULAR reporting. Pinging @Lard Almighty as they said this. Why we are allowing a CIRCULAR source? I believe an overdue trouting is due here. Ennis has specifically called out this article on TikTok, here. WP:PRIMARY sources are allowed on Wikipedia, and Ennis has clearly stated he will not give his DOB out online. I am going to remove the DOB as it is wrong, and from a source that is CIRCULAR. 11WB (talk) 06:16, 24 April 2026 (UTC)

The editor I pinged hasn't edited in over a year. Courtesy pinging @Ian Dalziel. 11WB (talk) 06:24, 24 April 2026 (UTC)

@Ollie231213, @Jsthewikiperson. Please see the previous discussions above before adding unsourced information to this BLP. WP:BLP needs to be followed without violating WP:CIRCULAR. Ennis has explicitly stated that 29 September 1980 is not his birthday. The previous My London source was published in August 2021, whilst the false DOB was added to the article in February 2021. 11WB (talk) 15:25, 14 June 2026 (UTC)