Talk:Elle and Blair Fowler/Archive 1

Archive 1

help

Can someone set this article straight. People from gurugossip.com are trolling on here.

Statements regarding the sisters' criticised pushing of diet products has been removed. Why? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.174.250.7 (talk) 02:13, 14 July 2011 (UTC) The criticism is seen in the comments on the article. Should we add something to citation to note this?

It needs a reliable source, like a newspaper article. Comments on an online article are not considered one. Falcon8765 ^(TALK) 02:18, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

OK. Hopefully they'll be an article on it soon. For now, could we at least note this posting as I'm predicting there will be serious flak from this?

I understand where you are coming from, but we cant speculate on future controversy without source.s Falcon8765 ^(TALK) 02:21, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Would the comment section not be seen as reliable? One has to make an account to comment there; it would be difficult for one person to post multiple comments of disapproval and approval aka demonstrating controversy (different of the opinions). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.174.250.7 (talk) 02:33, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

No, the comment section of a blog post is not a reliable source. See WP:Reliable Source, which I see you were directed to already -- Foetusized (talk) 11:11, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

I read through the reliable source page and am confused about one thing: I know that blogs are not acceptable sources, but since these two women have their own website, are we able to use self-published quotes from their own blogs, reblogged interviews, etc? For example, a lot of their background information doesn't come from news sources, since they're not well known outside of the YouTube beauty community. Do interviews they've done on YouTube or background information they've posted on their own website count as legitimate? There aren't a whole lot of official articles out there about their lives, and most of what we know about them comes from their own self-published material. Does someone need to write an article about their videos and blogs before they are considered legitimate? Because their subscribers, view counts, and things like that, as far as I know, come from their own YouTube videos, not established news sources. Do those need to be deleted as well for lack of verification? If that's the case, it's kind of difficult to expand this page, which is already pretty short, given the amount of information out there (from their self-published blogs, videos, etc.). I know comments aren't fair game any more than comments on a legitimate news article are fair game, but I'm wondering if the blogs themselves follow the same set of rules as user-created blogs or news blog sections, since we're not talking about blogs written by anyone - they're from the Elle and Blair official website. Lauren Irene (talk) 01:15, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Some of my edits were removed even though the previous information was incorrect. I changed it again but don't want to get another warning because of a false vandalism report. I changed "graduate" to "attend" because the article cited contains no mention of Elle graduating, I added Hannah's online pseudonym to her name (the girls have never referred to their sister as Emily -- they use the name Hannah, just as they use the names Elle and Blair for themselves), and I changed Blair's character in Prom from "Lee" to "Leah," in accordance with her own videos about the role as well as the IMDB page. Can I get some feedback on if and why these edits are inappropriate? As far as I know, I'm following guidelines and correcting false information. I didn't add my previous edits back in because I'm not sure if the sources count as legitimate (I added a section on their careers and mentioned their TCA nomination, citing their website and videos, where I got the information), but the other edits are correct for sure. Lauren Irene (talk) 16:52, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

From what I can tell ClueBot thought that the addition of the picture was possible vandalism, where from the looks of it it was just an incorrectly formatted image, and I believe it is programed to just reverts every edit that a particular person makes, as long as there is no edits inbetween. At least if ClueBot had thought the earlier edits, which are what you added back in, were vandalism it would've reverted sooner. From what I read on the bot's page it should not revert you again today, and I doubt that it will ever. Jnorton7558 (talk) 17:19, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from WikiAmandapedia, 25 July 2011

Change "Lisa "Elle" Fowler (born May 25, 1988)[1] and Laura "Blair" Fowler (born April 1, 1993)[2] are sisters who post beauty and style-related tutorials on YouTube under the monikers AllThatGlitters21 (Elle) and juicystar07 (Blair). They began posting videos in the summer of 2008, fast gaining popularity for their tutorials and haul videos. As of July 2011, Elle's videos on AllThatGlitters21 have been viewed more than 82 million times, while Blair's channel juicystar07 has received over 142 million views.[3][4] Both sisters also post vlogs under the monikers ElleGlitterGossip and otherjuicystar7, allowing subscribers to keep track of their daily lives outside of the YouTube community."

to

"Lisa "Elle" Fowler (born May 25, 1988)[1] and Laura "Blair" Fowler (born April 1, 1993)[2] are sisters who post beauty and style-related tutorials on YouTube under the monikers AllThatGlitters21 (Elle) and juicystar07 (Blair). Elle first stumbled into the beauty and fashion world of YouTube the summer of 2008, and soon convinced Blair to begin filming videos as well. Their videos of makeup tutorials and clothing hauls quickly garnered a large audience and rose in popularity. As of July 2011, Elle's videos on AllThatGlitters21 have been viewed more than 82 million times, while Blair's channel juicystar07 has received over 142 million views.[3][4]

To branch out of purely beauty and style-related videos, Elle and Blair each created a second YouTube account, ellesglittergossip and otherjuicystar07, respectively. On their second accounts, the sisters film vlogs that offer a glimpse into their daily lives, including their musings on books, fitness, and everyday subjects."

WikiAmandapedia (talk) 21:26, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. Jnorton7558 (talk) 04:42, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Partly done: I changed the first paragraph but did not change the second one. Jnorton7558 (talk) 08:41, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Undid edits by Jasmine Roses

I just undid some edits made by this user today. After looking at the history, it looks like this user made similar edits two days ago, which were also reverted. I'm not sure if that constitutes "vandalism" or warrants further protection of the page, but I just wanted to put it out there. This user shouldn't be re-editing information that was just corrected from her previous edits/deletions. Lauren Irene (talk) 18:40, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Update: Just restored the background section, which was blanked by another user. Is there a way to protect this page from edits that completely delete background information and entire sections? Lauren Irene (talk) 00:28, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

We could ask for semi-protection again, which would prevent changes from new account & IP address editors. It has been set for this article before -- Foetusized (talk) 01:56, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

The article now has semi-protection for 3 months. NtheP (talk) 11:39, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Some of the IP address editors were making legitimate edits, and it seems like there are only a handful of people who continuously delete information, blank sections, etc. I wish there were a way to just protect verified information so that people could have the opportunity to edit but not delete information and change their actual birth names and such, but I guess it doesn't work that way. Anyway, thanks for your help. Lauren Irene (talk) 00:54, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from WikiAmandapedia, 15 August 2011

Please remove the line "'The Fowler sisters have gotten lots of criticism for being fake and for hiding the fact that they were being compensated by some of these big companies.'" because the citation listed is incorrect and there is no basis. WikiAmandapedia (talk) 20:01, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

I double checked the KTLA video, and that is the quote verbatim (see: consumer expert at 2:43). Lauren Irene (talk) 14:45, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Edit Request

Can someone please change the girl's vlog channels' usernames. The page currently says ElleGlitterGossip and otherjuicystar7, but the true usernames are EllesGlitterGossip and otherjuicystar07. Also the tittle YouTube Careers should probably be changed to outside of YouTube or something of the sort as the paragraphs has nothing to do with YouTube, it is all about other opportunities the have had. The Background section is truely more about their YouTube Careers. Maybe it should be titled YouTube Careers instead. Just a thought :) FashionsAngels (talk) 00:03, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Fixed it! Lauren Irene (talk) 14:41, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank you :) FashionsAngels (talk) 22:24, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from WikiAmandapedia, 22 August 2011

Please change "Another KTLA segment featuring Elle and Blair pointed out that despite their growing number of fans, they've also encountered a great deal of backlash. "The Fowler sisters have gotten lots of criticism for being fake and for hiding the fact that they were being compensated by some of these big companies."[16] Other segments have also been critical of the hauling trend, using Elle and Blair's videos as examples of how haul videos have become extremely influential and may fuel shopping addiction and cultural idealizations of consumption and materialism." to "The sisters have a widespread influence. The videos they make on products they love have significant consequences. A single tweet about a Jewel Mint jewelry set caused the product to sell out in 12 hours; a single video about Folica.com increased its hair and beauty product sales by 330% in the first week of its upload, another more than tripling the Shoes of Prey website’s traffic and doubling their sales, and yet another crashing the website of Jesses Girl Cosmetics– all within the video’s first 15 minutes. The sisters As Elle and Blair grew in popularity, with videos garnering over 262 million combined views, they pushed beyond the bounds of YouTube and extended their influence to the greater world wide web, establishing the eponymous website ElleandBlair.com, which generates over a million visits per month. Their website cements their role as pioneers in the social media community of beauty and fashion-minded web surfers." because the edits are more relevant to their YouTube careers, which is the heading under which the above is in.

WikiAmandapedia (talk) 22:18, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

I really can't see replacing that cited content, with a bunch of detail with no citations at all. I could see adding such content, if it were referenced, but not to replace (and remove) the other. Just my 2 cents -- Foetusized (talk) 00:33, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Topher385 (talk) 09:56, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure how the KTLA video isn't relevant to their careers, since their appearances in the media are evidence of their growing popularity, but the section can always be expanded. I know they've made many videos about JewelMint and some of the other sponsors you mentioned, but I'll have to look up some sources in order to add that information. If you could provide some, that would be really helpful. I know there's a news video out there somewhere about Elle and the Guess watch that sold out once she mentioned it, for example - that would be great information to include, but I don't see why we'd delete one sentence and replace it with a lot of repetitive information, since all of these are just more examples of what's already been stated. Listing a bunch of products they've helped sell would be sort of like listing every single commercial a celebrity has ever been in as evidence of their influence. More relevant examples of their success would be things like the growth of Glitzy Glam and their nomination for a TCA, in my opinion. I'm not an expert on Wikipedia rules, but this page has been protected a few times because people keep adding information that isn't notable or referenced properly. Lauren Irene (talk) 16:41, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from WikiAmandapedia, 30 August 2011

Please add "The sisters have a widespread influence. The videos they make on products they love have significant consequences. A single tweet about a Jewel Mint jewelry set caused the product to sell out in 12 hours; a single video about Folica.com increased its hair and beauty product sales by 330% in the first week of its upload, another more than tripling the Shoes of Prey website’s traffic and doubling their sales (2), and yet another crashing the website of Jesses Girl Cosmetics– all within the video’s first 15 minutes (1). The sisters As Elle and Blair grew in popularity, with videos garnering over 262 million combined views, they pushed beyond the bounds of YouTube and extended their influence to the greater world wide web, establishing the eponymous website ElleandBlair.com, which generates over a million visits per month. Their website cements their role as pioneers in the social media community of beauty and fashion-minded web surfers." to the section under YouTube Careers. Citations are listed below.

(1) http://www2.wspa.com/news/2010/jun/16/shopping-haul-videos-internet-sensation-ar-376333/ (2) http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/the_web/article7078873.ece WikiAmandapedia (talk) 21:35, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

You are now able to edit the article yourself to make this addition. --Jnorton7558 (talk) 03:15, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Citations

YouTube is not a suitable citation and does not adhere to Wikipedia citation guidelines.User:Etrangere

Ethncity

3/4 Scots-Irish and 1/4 Turkish. What is Caucasia? --violetnese 19:42, 29 April 2016 (UTC)