Talk:Darragh Ennis

Reviewer Note
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)
 * 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)