Talk:Rose and Rosie

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 sourced must 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.

Biography: Arts and Entertainment

	Biography portal 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 supported by the arts and entertainment work group.

Comedy

	Comedy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy 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.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

LGBTQ+ studies

This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies articles

Women

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women 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.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women articles

Internet culture

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of internet culture 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.Internet cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Internet cultureTemplate:WikiProject Internet cultureInternet culture articles

???

This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Internet culture To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : View all requested internet culture articles
Expand : Pick an article from here or here
Photo : Category:Internet culture articles needing images
Stubs : All stubs are located here
Other : Category:Internet self-classification codes (!?); Try to get YouTube to FA; Tag all articles you find with {{WikiProject Internet culture}}
- See also Category:Internet culture articles needing attention

Contested deletion

This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because... (your reason here) --Lovatoxcabeyo (talk) 18:02, 28 April 2015 (UTC) Because both Rose Dix and Rosie Spaughton are well known YouTubers that have reached over 50.000.000 million views on their YouTube channel that proves their popular enough to be referred in this Encyclopedia.[reply]

@Lovatoxcabeyo: The number of YouTube views isn't directly an indication of importance, but coverage in The Huffington Post, Metro and BBC Radio 1 is. I've added sources from all three and declined the speedy. Given our concern over systemic bias and lack of prominent women figures on Wikipedia, this looks like an article well worth improving. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 18:44, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Rose's DOB

I'm not sure whether her own YouTube video is an acceptable source for a date of birth on Wikipedia, but Rose's birthday is mentioned in https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u3O6B5FVGMU&t=4m58. 2003:6C:CD4A:5E00:C10B:7ACE:79B5:2859 (talk) 21:38, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

– somebody found a better reference.

–84.46.53.34 (talk) 14:16, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

blp=yes vs. blpo=yes

Intuitively I'd replace blp=yes by blpo=yes, because the page is primarily about the YouTubers, not about their lives.^{TAG / ROSIE SPAUGHTON} On a real WP:BLP primary sources aren't too bad, as long as it's no pure self-promotion or other rubbish. –84.46.53.34 (talk) 10:34, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Subjective Statement and Need for Citation under Radio and television

The sentence "Camila is the pair’s ultimate celebrity crush, who they often fan-girl over in their videos" is opinionated, rather than factual. I suggest that it either be edited or removed. And, the entire paragraph ("The couple are very vocal ... In October 2017, Rose and Rosie had the opportunity to interview Camila Cabello at the BBC Radio 1’s Teen Awards") needs a citation. Otherwise, we do not have proof when or if Rose and Rosie interviewed Camila Cabello. SWAT2019 (talk) 05:22, 26 February 2019 (UTC)SWAT2019[reply]

New married name of 'Daughton'

Although they addressed the adoption of a combined married name of 'Daughton' (i.e. conflation of 'Dix' and 'Spaughton') in a recent video (linked in the article), their social media doesn't seem to bear out an actual change, perhaps implying the legal process has not (yet?) been undertaken, in which case this article is misrepresentative of fact. Perhaps the article should only reflect the apparently pending change once evidence exists that such has actually occurred?

Recently the article was again changed to give "Rose and Rosie Daughton" at the top; although they said they've chosen this combined married name, their social media etc still reflect "Dix" and (to a lesser extent since she uses "Roxetera") "Spaughton"; is there a reliable source to indicate they actually have adopted- and, equally relevant, USE- this name of "Daughton"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.144.79.130 (talk) 01:09, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As of July 2021, they still use "Dix" and "Spaughton", as per their social media accounts and media stories on the birth of their baby, so the article being changed to imply they're using the name/ are best known as "Daughton" is incorrect.

Rosie's secondary Instagram account, https://www.instagram.com/alifefullofroses/?hl=en , gives "Rosie Daughton", but Rose's Instagram and Twitter are both still "Rose Dix/ Rose Ellen Dix", which doesn't make the situation very clear, but it's evidently not accurate to say they're BOTH publicly using the surname at this time.

This issue once again arose in the article, with someone converting all "Dix" and "Spaughton" mentions to "Daughton"; again, their social media profiles do not reflect this change "officially", and, the kicker, Companies House- https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/09224443/officers- still gives them as "Dix" and "Spaughton", this requiring up-to-date legal documentation which would need to give their legal, official names. The filing history shows no update with new name of "Daughton", so all it amounts to thus far is an in-joke/ unofficial name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.109.205.41 (talk) 12:29, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Up-to-date legal documentation as required for a name change in this article. [1] [2] Erikleen (talk) 18:25, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Child's name

Why do people keep adding the child's name, as given by the parents on Instagram etc, without providing a citation? They seem to think attributing it to the current two articles mentioning his birth- neither of which gives his name- suffices, which it does not as the information added cannot be corroborated. Find a reliable source, attribute the name thereto, make the edit. This is not difficult.

Not sure why people... KEEP mindlessly adding this. I get it, they have fans, aw, isn't the baby cute, etc etc... but there hasn't yet been provided a reliable source. So don't add the name. Without a reliable source. This is EXTREMELY simple, and just makes those persistently adding it look, frankly, remedial.