Talk:Colleen Ballinger

Infobox

An editor suggested adding an infobox to this article, but it did not contain any information that was not already better presented in the narrative text of the WP:LEAD section. I do not believe that this article would benefit from an infobox. -- Ssilvers (talk) 03:17, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

• I personally am against using info boxes as I do not feel they contribute anything to an article - in fact they detract from it. I have never used one in my articles as all the information in an info box is already in the body of the article. Jack1956 (talk) 07:59, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

• I agree. As the editor who removed the IB in question (after its good faith inclusion by an IP), my rationale for doing so still stands: it's just not needed. All the information one needs is in the lead, and there is no need for the repetition for the third time on the page. - SchroCat (talk) 08:19, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

• My view of info-boxes is that they are useful to the reader if they display key information not otherwise available without reading the whole article. Thus, for biographies of sportsmen and –women their career statistics in a box are helpful. But I can't see what an info-box would add to the Ballinger page other than clutter. Looking at the box added by the anonymous editor, I was mightily underwhelmed. While I'm here, in the last sentence of the lead I had to read "Ballinger guest starred" twice to get its meaning. A hyphen would make it clearer, I think. – Tim riley talk 11:32, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

• I don't want to start another infobox war, but is there really anything so detrimental about having an infobox on the page? I believe that they provide important information quickly and at a glance for readers without the need to read through the lead or the body. Fezzerof^{(talk)/(contribs)} 10:31, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

• There is an easy way not to start an infobox war: respect the consensus of the talk page and don't include one. The consensus exists not to have one, and that is entirely in line with MoS guidelines. They do little to aid or educate, and reading he lead may well lead to knoelwdge and learning, rather than the drive by harvesting of trivia. - SchroCat (talk) 10:42, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

• Oppose infobox. No infobox is needed or would be helpful in this article. An editor recently suggested an infobox that contained information that was repetitive, gave undue weight to less important matters and did not assist the reader in understanding this topic. -- UWS Guy (talk) 05:44, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

I think we need to include an infobox for Colleen. Basically any page you go to has one, so what is so bad to put one on here? Put all her channels, subscriber and view counts and her play buttons on it for people looking for information about youtube and then all of her personal info as well like age, birthplace, stuff like that. Jeff.Abney99 (talk) 07:05, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

The Manual of Style says: "Whether to include an infobox ... is determined through discussion and consensus among the editors at each individual article." While sports and politician bios can benefit from infoboxes, most articles in liberal arts fields, as here, do not. See arbitration report: "Infoboxes may be particularly unsuited to liberal arts fields when they repeat information already available in the lead section of the article, are misleading or oversimplify the topic for the reader". I disagree with including an infobox in this article because: (1) The box would emphasize unimportant factoids stripped of context and lacking nuance, in competition with the WP:LEAD section, which emphasizes and contextualizes the most important facts. (2) Since the most important points in the article are already discussed in the Lead, or adequately discussed in the body of the article, the box would be redundant. (3) It would take up valuable space at the top of the article and hamper the layout and impact of the Lead. (4) Frequent errors creep into infoboxes, as updates are made to the articles but not reflected in the redundant info in the box, and they tend to draw more vandalism and fancruft than other parts of articles. (5) The infobox template creates a block of code at the top of the edit screen that discourages new editors from editing the article. (6) It would discourage readers from reading the text of the article. (7) IBs distract editors from focusing on the content of the article. Instead of improving the article, they spend time working on this repetitive feature and its coding and formatting. See also WP:DISINFOBOX. -- Ssilvers (talk) 17:20, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Middle name

Per WP:RS and WP:BLP, we cannot add Evans' middle name unless we can cite a publication that confirms that information. If Evans had used her middle name when she was interviewed by the press or put out press releases, it would be published in a newspaper or magazine, but it is not. Of course, we can add it if she indicates that she is going to use it officially, by putting out a press release, or saying so on Twitter. Or, she can put it in the "about" page of her YouTube account or her official Facebook page, https://www.facebook.com/Colleenb1234/info?tab=page_info. If you look carefully, it appears that Evans has actually been careful to *avoid* using her middle name on most social media. -- Ssilvers (talk) 04:11, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Particularly pertinent as there is more than one way of spelling the name that has been inserted – Mae or May: both have been removed recently, and having the wrong spelling is much worse than showng nothing until there is certainty. – SchroCat (talk) 13:53, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

What about this page? https://www.facebook.com/colleen.mae.3?fref=ts This is her facebook. Now what? Happy now? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.216.29.240 (talk) 14:41, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Her middle name is also included on IMDb. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.216.29.240 (talk) 14:47, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

That is her *private* family and friends-only page. Also, IMDb is definitely *not* a reliable source. Evans' public Facebook pages, and in fact ALL of her public social media, is careful to exclude the middle name. We either need a WP:RS showing that she is using the middle name publicly, or an unambiguous self-published source stating that she now prefers to use the middle name. As I noted above, one could conclude, from the available evidence, that she prefers *not* to use the middle name. We are careful about this with respect to biographies of living persons. See WP:RS and WP:BLP. -- Ssilvers (talk) 14:49, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Regardless of whether she wants it to be used or not, her private facebook plus that video posted by Joshua constitutes reliable source that her middle name indeed is Mae. Wikipedia should provide accurate information instead of what you deem should be public knowledge versus not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.216.29.240 (talk) 14:47, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

If she didn't intend to use her middle name publicly, why would she used it in a recent video?— Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.216.29.240 (talk) 14:47, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Again, please review WP:BLP. If you think you are correct, you need to build a WP:Consensus of Wikipedia editors to add the middle name to the article. See WP:Consensus. You should not WP:Edit war to get your own way. -- Ssilvers (talk) 15:14, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Based on your opinions, we should change this page back to Colleen Ballinger because there is no reliable sources stating that she has changed her name. Her public facebook, twitter, youtube and all social media still refers to herself as Colleen Ballinger. You cannot have it both ways. You can either include her middle name and have the page as "Colleen Mae Evans" or change it to "Colleen Ballinger".— Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.216.29.240 (talk) 14:47, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

This article verifies that she has taken the surname Evans. Evans herself stated in several places on social media that she intended to officially use the surname Evans, which complies with WP:SPS. What we are missing, regarding the middle name, is an announcement by Evans herself that she intends to use her middle name officially. I added a footnote with some refs in the body of article after the date of the wedding. [Update: she has now changed her main Facebook/psychosoprano page title to "Colleen Evans".] -- Ssilvers (talk) 18:02, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Colleen's mom just confirmed that her middle name is Mae so yeah. Change it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.216.29.240 (talk) 18:26, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Once again, it doesn't matter what her mom says. Evans needs to say, herself, that she wishes to use the middle name. Edit add: on July 7, she posted another video where she states her name as "Colleen Evans". She did not use her middle name. -- Ssilvers (talk) 18:29, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

She did say it herself in the video I linked above. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.216.29.240 (talk) 19:38, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

You just said the problem is whether if it was Mae or May. Now she confirmed that it is Mae you're saying it doesn't matter? She did indeed say it herself in the video with Joshua so this trumps the statement that she had never used it publicly. I'm pretty sure using her full name in a video is public. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.216.29.240 (talk) 18:37, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

So do we have a consensus that we can add her middle name on this page or am I going to be banned by Nazis for providing accurate information? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.216.29.240 (talk) 18:56, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

No, there is no consensus to change her name. You are not able to do it because the page has been locked down, and if you continue to abuse other editors you will face a complaint against you for your behaviour: this could lead to a block of your IP address. - SchroCat (talk) 19:03, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

I finally got it a few months ago, Schrocat. I probably looked just like this IP at the time we were disgreeing over Stanley Holloway's infobox, or was it his place of birth? Live and learn... Anyway, I hope to become the kind of contributor that you and Cassianto are. Scr★pIron^IV 19:14, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks ScrapIronIV - SchroCat (talk) 19:28, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Why is there no consensus over her middle name? You said it was not used in a confirmed source, yet her mother, the person who named her, confirmed the spelling as Mae. Then you said she herself had never used it in any publication, yet she herself said it in a new video which was published just this past week. Now you are saying that it should not be added simply because you say so? How is this different than the North Koreans limiting the Internet from the citizens because they want accurate information? - 73.216.29.240 (talk) 15:19 EST, 7 July 2015 — Preceding undated comment added 19:19, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Today, Evans changed one of her two main Facebook page title from "Colleen Ballinger" to "Colleen Evans". No middle name. -- Ssilvers (talk) 13:47, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 July 2015

Since her mother has confirmed that Colleen's middle name is indeed Mae, and that Colleen herself has used it in a recent video, I think it is the responsibility of the Wikipedia community to provide accurate information and to add her middle name to the page. 73.216.29.240 (talk) 19:21, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

• Oppose I am desperately looking for a source in this request, and fail to see one. Scr★pIron^IV 19:25, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

• • Source Here is the source of her mother confirming the name: https://twitter.com/pixietangerine/status/618240820483743744 and here is the video of herself saying her full name: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5e05H3EzrVY (fast forward to 00:07) there you go - 73.216.29.240 (talk) 19:27, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

• • • Neither the twitterfeed of someone who may or may not be the subject's mother nor a YouTube video meet the criteria for a reliable source Scr★pIron^IV 19:35, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

• • • • First of all, it is indeed her mother's twitter feed. (source here: https://twitter.com/ColleenB123/status/556270345699995648) Colleen said so herself as well. And the video, per "Definition of published," "However, audio, video, and multimedia materials that have been recorded then broadcast, distributed, or archived by a reputable party may also meet the necessary criteria to be considered reliable sources", is considered reliable source because it came from the subject herself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.216.29.240 (talk) 19:40, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

• Denied, per the discussion above, and the initial consensus against the move. Should the consensus change, or RELIABLESOURCES be found, which would change the situation, the edit may then be valid, but not yet. - SchroCat (talk) 19:26, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Why is it still denied? The "discussion" above is just you yourself dictating what goes on Wikipedia. Last time I check, Wikipedia edits are based on collaboration instead of dictatorship. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.216.29.240 (talk) 19:50, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

So my response gets removed while his personal attack on me stays? This website is such a toxic environment. i just know that Colleen will not care whether she has a wiki page or not. You guys are rude and unhelpful and sarcastic. I hope you all lead a hard life. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.216.29.240 (talk) 20:02, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

What is important is that (1) there are no reliable, sources, as defined under our guidelines, that state her middle name; and (2) Evans, herself, has not made an unambiguous statement, either on social media or in the press, that she wishes the media to use her middle name (see WP:SPS). As I pointed out above, the fact that she has never used her middle name in her numerous press interviews, *and* she has never requested on social media that people use it, are indications that she does not prefer to use it. See WP:BLP. If, in the future, she begins to use the middle name in press interviews, OR specifically requests media to use it, OR adds it to her "about" pages on social media, then we would be warranted in adding it here. If you have nothing new to add, then just wait until you do. -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:14, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Infobox and discography

There is a consensus not to use an infobox in this article. See above and also see WP:DISINFOBOX.

Also, no discography is warranted here. This person's recordings have never charted and are not important to her career. See WP:TRIVIA. -- Ssilvers (talk) 02:48, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

I agree that the recordings do not seem significant to this person's career. I do not think the discography or an infobox are appropriate. -- UWS Guy (talk) 05:44, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Entirely concur about the info-box. We've already agreed on this page that so far as this article is concerned an IB is a waste of space and no help to the reader. I don't know enough about the topic to have an informed opinion about the discography, but we seem to be moving in the direction of a consensus to exclude it, and I am happy to join that consensus. Tim riley talk 07:19, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Ditto on both: the discog fails notability (although some reference does need to be made in the text that she has released discs of her material); the IB is redundant here as the lead covers everything that is needed, and provides it in a more informative way that provides necessary conext. - SchroCat (talk) 09:00, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

This is a pop culture bio, most of the pop culture articles have infoboxes, (see, e.g. Brian Wilson) this debate is just the usual IDONTLIKEIT. I re-added the discography too, as a performer's works generally are listed, wether they "chart" or not. But I have no objections if others think it is irrelevant. Montanabw^(talk) 09:03, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Colleen Evans
In 2012
Born	Colleen Ballinger (1986-08-21) August 21, 1986 Santa Barbara, California, US
Years active	2006–present

Compromise: I suggest to trim the infobox to life data, we don't desperately need twitter etc. - They who mention disinfobox should also mention its refutation. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:22, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Pictured what I mean. as t was removed again. If I read the article history right, seven different users have added an infobox to this article ([1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7]), but some editors still claim that there is "consensus" not to have one? - There is never a "need" to have one, as there is never a "need" for an image, but if it is helpful for a few, why not? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:10, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

No need for an infobox which does not add anything to the more extensive info covered in the lead. Ditto for the discography - not needed as she has not had chart success.Jack1956 (talk) 10:07, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

• Per Ssilvers and others. I oppose an infobox on this article. The discography is not much better. Cassianto^Talk 12:11, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
  • I am a great fan of Gerda, but her doctrinaire insistence on IBs is well known, and I think focused common sense tells us that the IB is not helpful here. Tim riley talk 14:09, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
    • Let's avoid the personalization, Tim. That's uncalled for. If everyone wants to throw a fit over an infobox again, you are going against the tide of wikipedia, but oh well. While infoboxes actually are almost always helpful, particularly when well-designed to emit microdata and be viewable on a mobile device, you don't have to agree. The rule is infoboxes are decided on an article by article basis, so if it's going to cause huge drama, fine. You don't have to have an infobox, no matter what your reasons. Montanabw^(talk) 07:13, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
      • I am surprised (but then nothing surprises me anymore) that a call for compromise is labeled "doctrinaire insistence" (meaning what?), and that "well known" (meaning what?). Seven different people installed an infobox, - how can "consensus" be claimed not to have one, disregarding these people? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:27, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

[Left] Gerda, counting old insertions of infoboxes is a specious argument. I could counter it by saying that thousands, or millions of people did *not* install an infobox. In this discussion, however, 5 editors are arguing against an infobox, and only two are arguing for it. But we are supposed to focus on rationale, not counting. I believe that while sports and politician bios can benefit from infoboxes, most articles, as here, do not. Here are some reasons why I disagree with including an infobox in this article: (1) The box does not emphasize the most important information, as the narrative WP:LEAD section does so well. Instead, it presents disconnected facts stripped of context and lacking nuance. (2) The most important points about the article that could be mentioned in the infobox are already discussed in the Lead, so the box is redundant. (3) It takes up valuable space at the top of the article and includes some less important factoids that are better discussed in the body of the article below. (4) It limits the size of the first photo and hampers the layout and impact of the Lead. (5) Frequent errors creep into infoboxes, and they tend to draw vandalism and fancruft. (6) Starting the article with the infobox template creates a lot of code near the top of the article that discourages new editors from editing the article. (7) It distracts editors from focusing on the content of the article. Instead of improving the article, they spend time working on this repetitive feature and its coding and formatting. -- Ssilvers (talk) 08:00, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

I am not counting, and I try to avoid infobox discussions and there repetitive arguments. (The image size is free, to mention just one. Being afraid of vandalism would be same for articles in general, another). I pleasantly remember having approved this for DYK, not mentioning the topic ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:31, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

Haha! It's good to see you, but mostly I only see you during infobox discussions, so you must really love them! As for errors, vandalism and fancruft (my argument no. 5 above), I strongly disagree with you – it is not the same: Infoboxes draw an extraordinary amount of silly fancruft, errors and vandalism; far more than narrative text, and the information in them is often inconsistent with the information in the article, because people make changes to one but forget the other. So, again because of their repetitive nature, many infoboxes are just another opportunity for inexperienced or poor editors to get it wrong. But look above for half a dozen more reasons why an infobox would not be helpful in this article. -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:07, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

Look for me under the GA nominations, perhaps, or at my more than 100 DYK reviews in 2015 ;) - I don't care if this lady has an infobox or not. The infoboxes I create don't draw fancruft, and Beethoven hasn't been changed since it appeared in the article. Sorry for your unhappier experiences, - and out ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:19, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

Whoa! This is more of a press release than an informative article. Stick to the Wiki guidelines re: (shameless) self-promo please. ----

And most importantly, haters back off. seriously, haters gonna hate, potatoes going to potate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Henryholiesterfire (talk • contribs) 04:46, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

Married

How come it doesn't say Colleen is married when she is? I have proof I saw her wedding video on YouTube.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Editqueen35 (talk • contribs) 01:27, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Yes, it certainly *does* say that she is married. -- Ssilvers (talk) 07:38, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Name change back to Ballinger

Although Ballinger married Joshua David Evans in 2015 and briefly used Evans professionally, she has returned to using Colleen Ballinger as her professional name, as reported today in Variety. See also this and this. Ballinger also changed her social media account descriptions back to "Ballinger". See this (at the top), this and this. -- Ssilvers (talk) 03:37, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

• Support If that's the name she'll be known by, that's the one we sold be using. – SchroCat (talk) 18:36, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

As no one has objected to this request after several days, I've gone ahead and implemented the pagemove. Newyorkbrad (talk) 18:19, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Thank you! -- Ssilvers (talk) 18:54, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 July 2016

I'd like to add an infobox youtube personality and edit some misspelled words :) --0 Madgrindem (talk) 23:02, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

There is a WP:CONSENSUS *not* to include an infobox on this article. See the discussion above and also WP:DISINFOBOX for some helpful discussion about this. What misspelled words do you see? Let me know, and I'll correct them. -- Ssilvers (talk) 23:58, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 September 2016

On September 30th, 2016, Colleen and both Joshua made a video on both of their YouTube channels announcing they are no longer together and that they are getting a divorce. -- SCVKMT (talk) 22:11, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

The divorce announcement is mentioned in the article. -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:28, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

Divorce announcement

The divorce announcement is already mentioned in the article. Evans and Ballinger are *still married*, as a divorce can take a long time to finalize. No further details have been announced. -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:30, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

Please change the marriage to divorce because it is now been finalized by Colleen that the documents have gone in and when you announce a divorce you are divorced. Like an engagement, when he proposes and you say yes you are officially engaged. Note: Divorced on 30 Sep 2016 Sheldy5342 (talk) 22:50, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Please read WP:V and WP:RS carefully. If you have a WP:RS that states with authority that the divorce is finalized, please supply the link. -- Ssilvers (talk) 23:11, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Note that in California a divorce takes a minimum of 6 months from the date that the papers are served by one spouse upon the other. So, it appears that this divorce cannot be finalized until at least March 2017, and only if everything happens as fast as possible. -- Ssilvers (talk) 11:28, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Cut the content down, please

There are important politicians, academics and artists who have 1/10 of this amount of content on their biographies. This is a minor YouTube celebrity who is only of interest to her fans. Not every.single.thing.she.has.done is notable or noteworthy. Can someone chop this down to size, so that it only includes her best achievements? 2601:1C0:6D01:1800:5405:7677:9552:6B79 (talk) 00:59, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

I agree. This is a ridiculously, needlessly long article. 2601:483:100:CB54:74C5:D574:4F52:C186 (talk) 01:22, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

Why so insistent on omitting serial commas?

She's American. Most American style guides encourage serial commas. There is no benefit at all to omitting them, there is only the added risk of non-native speakers getting confused. This "go to the Talk Page" strategy is cute, by the way. You all know that you'll outnumber me, so that is why you give me the false impression that I can "BRD". Wash whites separately (talk) 21:30, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

First of all, please stop WP:Edit warring. This article's editors have, to date, consistently chosen not to use the serial comma, and, per MOS:SERIAL, the article omits it consistently. There is no consensus to add it. It clutters up sentences. -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:35, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

(edit conflict) See also: User talk:Wash whites separately#Colleen Ballinger. Consensus-building often relies on discussion, and it's not a strict vote. Therefore, simply being "outnumbered" doesn't guarantee a defeated argument. WWS, it would have been useful if you had included an edit summary with your initial edits explaining your rationale behind including serial commas. I have no input on whether the serial comma should be included in this article, but would be happy to assist in resolving this dispute amicably. Airplaneman ✈ 21:41, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Airplaneman. WWS and I disagreed about the serial comma at Sia Furler. I followed the procedure at WP:BRD and reverted. Instead of then bringing the discussion to the articles' Talk pages per WP:BRD, WWS began to edit war at that article. Then he followed my recent edits to several articles that he had never edited before, including this one, Miranda Sings, Oscar Asche and Chu Chin Chow, initiating edit wars there and again refusing to follow the WP:BRD procedure. -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:45, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

I agree that the serial comma should be omitted in this article. I agree that it generally clutters up sentences with embedded lists. I am American and I do not agree that most American style guides encourage serial commas for expository writing. Somambulant1 (talk) 22:13, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

I also agree that the serial comma is unnecessary in articles and clutters up sentences. Jack1956 (talk) 22:29, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 November 2016

Colleen Ballinger and Joshua Evans are now divorced. Colleen's photo is out of date as well. Rtblack628 (talk) 21:23, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

We state in the article that they are divorcing. A divorce in California takes a *minimum* of 6 months after the petition is filed with the respondent, so the divorce cannot have been finalized yet (see above). If you have a newer public domain image, we'd be happy to add it. -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:26, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Colleen Ballinger. 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/culturemonster/2009/05/miranda-sings-colleen-ballinger-jim-caruso-cast-party-jersey-boys-daniel-reichard.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140812073132/http://www.teenchoiceawards.com/tcnews.aspx to http://www.teenchoiceawards.com/tcnews.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 21:36, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

Infobox edit war

Hi, As noted directly above the article doesn't need an infobox because all of the info would be directly next to it therefore making an infobox pointless and redundant, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 17:41, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Agreed! Thanks! -- Ssilvers (talk) 00:38, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

I think that more information has been added to this page since that decision was made. It is now necessary to include an infobox for quick reference. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Laurenann1401 (talk • contribs) 20:09, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

I agree with Davey and the earlier discussion. No infobox would be helpful in this article. UWS Guy (talk) 01:30, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Colleen Ballinger. 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://web.archive.org/web/20131029204607/http://www.playbill.com/news/article/157833-PHOTO-CALL-Miranda-Sings-Christmas-Spectacular-With-Lauren-Kennedy-and-Frankie-Grande to http://www.playbill.com/news/article/157833-PHOTO-CALL-Miranda-Sings-Christmas-Spectacular-With-Lauren-Kennedy-and-Frankie-Grande
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110201232947/http://mirandasingsaustralia.com/ to http://www.mirandasingsaustralia.com/

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) 04:04, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Colleen Ballinger. 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://web.archive.org/web/20120315052828/http://highlandpark.patch.com/articles/americas-got-no-talent to http://highlandpark.patch.com/articles/americas-got-no-talent
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131029193619/http://www.cabaretscenes.org/cabaret_reviews/2012/may12/miranda%20_sings_5-12.html to http://www.cabaretscenes.org/cabaret_reviews/2012/may12/miranda%20_sings_5-12.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110725214331/http://www.cytsandiego.org/dca to http://www.cytsandiego.org/dca
• Added archive https://archive.is/20140112185415/http://www.freenewspos.com/english/video/Best%20Buy/A8SRs6cloT8 to http://www.freenewspos.com/english/video/Best%20Buy/A8SRs6cloT8

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) 16:13, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Rachel Ballinger

I think we should start on Colleen about Rachel's rise in fame! --I Have Always Been a Twin (talk) 16:33, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, but I must disagree. Rachel is not even close to being Notable by Wikipedia standards. According to social blade, she is the 13,474th most notable YouTuber. Her overall social media fan base is relatively low, and she has no notable acting or other entertainment credits. -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:32, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Colleen Ballinger. 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://web.archive.org/web/20141006082530/http://emertainmentmonthly.com/2014/03/08/channel-spotlight-colleen-ballinger/ to http://emertainmentmonthly.com/2014/03/08/channel-spotlight-colleen-ballinger
• Added archive https://archive.is/20150404110155/http://yobi.tv/take_the_stage_webseries/cast/16/JoshuaDNYC to http://yobi.tv/take_the_stage_webseries/cast/16/JoshuaDNYC
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.broadwayworld.com/article/THe_2010_Nightlife_Awards_20010101
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150217045407/http://www.nbc.com/the-tonight-show/segments/77811 to http://www.nbc.com/the-tonight-show/segments/77811
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150803012944/http://www.look.co.uk/Miranda%20sings%20actress%20hits%20back%20at%20haters to http://www.look.co.uk/Miranda%20sings%20actress%20hits%20back%20at%20haters

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) 10:55, 21 January 2018 (UTC)