Talk:Chris Denning

Article for Deletion

Archived deletion debate: consensus was to keep

Is this insignificant paedophile really worthy an article in Wikipedia? To me, that's maybe a news item, but not encyclopedia material. (38 Googlits for +"Chris Denning" +paedophile) Delete. Lupo 12:13, 19 Jul 2004 (UTC)

• Keep. Perhaps not particularly noteworthy as a paedophile per se, but he's a former well-known DJ too. Lupin 12:31, 19 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  • looks like the guy was a BBC Radio 1 DJ as well, which makes him IMHO inclusion-worthy (not that I'd shed a tear if he fell foul of something nasty in Slovakis (sic)). I vote keep, provided someone rewrites the illiterate drivel initial contribution to something more readable. Ianb 15:30, 19 Jul 2004 (UTC)
• Keep, provided someone does an NPOV rewrite. Gamaliel 19:37, 19 Jul 2004 (UTC)

End archived discussion

POV statement about Slovakia?

After his release, Denning went to live in Slovakia, where the age of consent is fifteen.

Why is it relevant to mention Slovakia's age of consent here? It implies that Slovakia is some sort of seedy haven for men who lust after young boys. In fact, many countries have an age of consent of 15 or lower, and even in Denning's native Great Britain the age of consent is only one year older than this (i.e. 16). 217.155.20.163 19:33, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Any links with Jimmy Savile?

Seems the BBC was a veritable nest of paedophiles - wasn't Denning a producer on some of JS's radio shows ?? 80.42.237.44 (talk) 00:38, 23 October 2012 (UTC)twl00:38, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Unsourced

I've had to delete quite a lot of information about Denning for the moment. The claims regarding his convictions may all be true, but they are currently unsourced. To make such allegations without verification leaves Wikipedia prone to legal claims of libel: WIkipedia's guidelines regarding biographies of living persons makes it very clear: "(c)ontentious material about living persons (or in some cases, recently deceased) that is unsourced or poorly sourced – whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable – should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion" (their emphasis, not mine). I'm sure there must be plenty of citable sources for the claims: if these are included, the material can be re-added, but until then, we need to stick to provable facts ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 17:12, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

added one reliable source (via an edit conflict) but others need to be found. Edmund Patrick – confer 17:32, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Thumbs up from me on that - that's much better. I've re-jigged the formatting of some of the references, 'coz I'm a bit of a nerd like that. Regards, ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 18:46, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Birth details

I've reinserted his date of birth, which is attested from various sources including those sites loosely described as "genealogy sites" which are not user-generated but which are repositories of official registration details. Ghmyrtle (talk) 19:06, 22 May 2014 (UTC) Confirmation of the year 1941 in his own words here, further source for the date here. Ghmyrtle (talk) 19:20, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

This is OK. I've been wary of genealogy sites ever since some people got themselves excited over a claim that Adam Lanza, perpetrator of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting‎, died on the day before the shooting.[1]. Also, if a person has a common name like John Smith, there is considerable scope for misinterpreting search results even if they are reliable.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 19:32, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

Except that there's only one Christopher Denning born in 1941, and the birth record actually basically backs up the previously existing birth details on this article. His birth certificate will state Uxbridge as per Findmypast - Hayes is only about 3 miles from there and presumably comes under the Uxbridge ward. It isn't conflicting information. Without a real reference for Hayes, the only possible ref available is birth records. I see no problem with using official birth records as references when there is no doubt about the information in question.

92.8.21.242 (talk) 20:26, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

I agree. But, we now have a better ref for birth date and place, from The Prague Post. Ghmyrtle (talk) 20:28, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

Operation Arundel

There is a reference to an Operation Arundel. It needs an article really. --Money money tickle parsnip (talk) 19:26, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

"is openly gay"

The main sexual substance of this article is paedophilia, which - despite some people's claim to the contrary - is not the same thing as homosexuality. Just as most straight people aren't paedophiles, nor are most gay or bisexual people. But the fact that Denning "is openly gay" is loosely dropped into the text as if it had some bearing on the matter. To compare this with the articles on Jimmy Savile, there is no mention there that Savile, who preyed on both girls and boys (as well as adults), was bisexual. So I don't see why Denning's being gay should be mentioned here at all. Even the fact that he was a "rent boy", which presumably involved sex with adult men, is surely no reason to suppose that he would "therefore" be sexually attracted to children. Of course, having been abused as a teenager by older men might have inclined him to do the same with younger boys - but I feel there's a glib assumption here that all these things are automatically related.178.197.239.134 (talk) 21:55, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

Denning has said he was 'out' as a gay man during his period at Radio 1, and most colleagues knew. This cannot really not be mentioned, but I have tried to place these details where they are less conspicuous. In public, Savile usually tried to present himself as being asexual. Philip Cross (talk) 23:18, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

I have some sympathy with OP's position because gay men are not automatically paedophiles, this is a myth. However, the article cannot hide key facts per WP:NOTCENSORED.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 05:26, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

His status as an out gay man was, then, essentially a disguise, a cover for his actual area of interest; as well, possibly, as being a kind of "story" he might have told himself to salvage some self-respect. Always assuming he has any acknowledgement of his own guilt at all.

Nuttyskin (talk) 19:32, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Top of the Pops presenter

Re this edit: I saw the source but the International Business Times is largely a rehash of material from other news sources and it doesn't say that Denning presented TOTP, only that he took boys to recordings of it, which is what other sources say. List of Top of the Pops presenters says that he presented the show on 7 December 1967 and 22 February 1968, but the IBT source does not confirm this. It may be correct but isn't in the TOTP episode guide here which is rather incomplete.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 07:20, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

Both episodes given on the Wikipedia page as being presented by Denning are listed in the BBC Genome/Radio Times site as being presented by Pete Murray: 7 December 1967 here and 22 February 1968 here. Might have been changed after the magazine went to press, but this is enough to doubt if Denning was the actual host. His own credits in the BBC Genome site do not include Top of the Pops. Philip Cross (talk) 08:01, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, I've reverted unless some clear evidence comes along that Denning did present TOTP.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 08:13, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Chris Denning. 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:

• Added archive https://archive.is/20130910203650/http://www.praguepost.com/archivescontent/34384-denning-going-against-social-norms.html to http://www.praguepost.com/archivescontent/34384-denning-going-against-social-norms.html

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) 21:22, 5 August 2017 (UTC)