This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica articles
I wrote the article and I've never met, or met anyone who has met, Mercy Muroki. The difficulty with writing about borderline notable people is that the articles can sometimes become lists of their writings or appointments, because that's mainly what exists. I hope that at least the part that I wrote is objective. Feel free to AfD if you like. Unknown Temptation (talk) 15:15, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
She's a new figure, so the info is going to be light for the time being. When criticism and more info comes out, I am sure it'll be added. Solipsism 101 (talk) 18:12, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This is ridiculous. It's her account - who on earth would post about her daughter if not her? 2.28.235.138 (talk) 18:03, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It's an unverified account, and it doesn't support any date of birth anyway since it suggests rather than makes clear. FDW777 (talk) 18:10, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with 2.28.235.138 that the account is probably hers and the date is probably correct, but I agree with FDW777 that the quality of the source doesn't meet our current (quite strict) criteria for inclusion. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 18:14, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
So put a note in saying that (as so many other entries have) have rather than deleting it completely. 2.28.235.138 (talk) 18:17, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
They're not unverifiable. All of GB News is on YouTube/its own website where they can be checked. Or perhaps you think someone saying "It's my birthday is lying.2.28.235.138 (talk) 18:45, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
In any case, why would I - or anyone - make up Mercy's birthday? Why would anyone go to the trouble of checking Mercy's Instagram (and it is her Instagram) and then inserting incorrect info? Surely if I was a "disrupter" I would be including wrong/false/fake info all over the shop? 2.28.235.138 (talk) 19:02, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think there's any serious doubt that the information is correct: I have found lower precision dates that match this one in two independent sources. But like the instagram comment these sources don't meet the strict requirements at WP:BLP, which means (1) that any editor can remove the date unless and until a suitable source is found, and (2) in the event of an "edit war" the removing editor is going to win. I understand that this may well seem ridiculous to the IP editor, but ridiculous or not that is quite simply how things are. The fact that improperly referenced dates exist at other pages is not relevant here: a similar challenge on those pages would end in a similar way. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 21:15, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Just to re-iterate, under our policies and guidelines an unverified Twitter account does not comply with WP:ABOUTSELF. Yes the account very likely belongs to her but if it's unverified on Twitter and has no external verification it's out as an RS. (I mention external verification since besides a blue tick, IMO we can probably accept a link from another verified social media account or high quality RS saying it's the subject's Twitter account.) And I'd never assume that someone saying "TWENTY SIX FEELS PRETTY GOOD 🎂🥂" means it's their birthday that specific day. It's entirely reasonable it could be one or more days ago; and in some cases it's even something a person may say weeks or months after their birthday. Yes there is the image which suggests a celebration likely of their birthday but frankly once we start ourselves intepreting images that way it gets very WP:ORy, especially when we are intepreting the images and text together. But putting that aside, while it does make it more likely their birthday is very recent. However I still don't see why people assume that someone only ever celebrates their birthday on the exact day, from my experience, it's hardly uncommon people celebrate their birthday on days other than the exact date. And there's no reason to assume someone will make it entirely clear in a social media post if their actually a few days ago when nothing they said indicates it was the exact day. (And while perhaps not so likely for a 26 year old especially given the type of image, it's a single post on Instagram etc, there's also the possibility the celebration was on the exact date but the post was not.) Now if someone says "today is my birthday" we can reasonably assume it's the exact date (putting aside timezone complexities) or if their actual birthday was a few days ago, this is a probably suggests they don't want social media followers to know the exact date but a lot of posts aren't like that. They key point is that it doesn't matter. It appears likely that the subject of this article doesn't care that their birtdate is known, however we need better confirmation both that they don't care and of the exact date if we're going to repeat it. For many lowish profile subjects and even the occasional high profile one, we simply don't have that and so we should not report a date. Someone's exact date of birth is almost like trivia anyway although age or rough birthday may be of significance here especially since we report she was the youngest researcher for something, so it would be useful if we could find an RS which gives a rough age. Nil Einne (talk) 07:49, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You can find her exact date on Instagram and IMDB, neither of which is reliable. You can find the month and year at Companies House, but that's primary. You can find an approximate age consistent with both of these in the Daily Mail, but that's so deprecated these days as to be effectvely unusable. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 08:50, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose we could use an "age as of" template with iNews? FDW777 (talk) 09:16, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm puzzled Nil Einne (talk). Where are you looking? Mercy does have a verified twitter account and on that, there is a link to her Instagram. The Instagram account in which she mentions her birthday also has mentions that day from her colleagues.2.28.235.138 (talk) 18:31, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
She doesn't "mention her birthday". She says "TWENTY SIX FEELS PRETTY GOOD". FDW777 (talk) 18:37, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
What other possible meaning could that have? Especially when every other mention that day consists of people wishing her a happy birthday. I think you are just being obtuse now. You know it's her birthday. You just don't want to admit I have been right all along.2.28.235.138 (talk) 18:43, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry I meant Instagram. If the Instagram account is linked from her verified Twitter account, I'm willing to put the unverified bit aside although others may disagree. We still have the other problems, and I'd note what other people say clearly does not comply with WP:ABOUTSELF. Also I'll just re-iterate what I said above. Putting everything else aside, I have no idea why you think people only ever celebrate their birthday on the exact date, it's definitely not the norm for a lot of people where it's perfectly reasonable the celebration may not be on the exact date. Likewise, if someone posts a picture of them celebrating their birthday and you haven't already wished them (and occasionally even if you did), it's entirely reasonable to wish someone happy birthday with no further clarification. It may very well be her birthday, I don't care it's a moot point unless we have clear sourcing. Being right on Wikipedia is pointless if you don't have sources to support your "rightness". If you want to edit Wikipedia, especially in relation to BLPs, you have to accept that a lot of time you're sure something is right, but also sure there is insufficient sourcing to include. Nil Einne (talk) 19:16, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
"I have no idea why you think people only ever celebrate their birthday on the exact date" -- can you please point to where I have said or claimed this. Yes, of course, if people have a birthday on a Tuesday or Wednesday they may well wait until the weekend to celebrate but that is not what Mercy is doing. She is clearly saying today (19 July) is her birthday and her GB News colleagues are wishing her a happy birthday for that day. In addition, if someone is celebrating their birthday after or before their birthday they tend to make that point. They say "Out to celebrate my birthday". They don't say it's their birthday when it isn't. 2.28.235.138 (talk) 19:30, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Three editors have said the Instagram post is insufficient, see WP:BLUDGEON. FDW777 (talk) 20:20, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
And? I reckon you are objecting because you are a racist. Picking on an entry for a young black woman? Shame on you! 2.28.235.138 (talk) 21:08, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
