Jump to content

Talk:Barbie

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by IsadoraofIbiza (talk | contribs) at 21:56, 14 October 2023 (→the doll of the judge is so important it requires a mention in the lede section: wrong link). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Vital article

Share a Smile Becky's wheelchair

Article states Mattel said (back in the 90s) they would redesign the Barbie Dream House to accommodate Share A Smile Becky's wheelchair. Did that happen? Word is they discontinued the doll instead. Are we giving Mattel free PR here? 45.16.144.177 (talk) 19:58, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Barbara Millicent Roberts in the opening sentence

Re this edit: As I said previously, the doll's WP:COMMONNAME is Barbie and it is never sold under the name Barbara Millicent Roberts. There seems to be a certain amount of WP:RECENTISM driven by the release of the new Barbie film. The full name doesn't need to be in the opening sentence. ♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 12:52, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The in-universe name of the fictional character (the term "Barbie" has evolved from just the doll and is also considered a fictional character, which is mentioned in the lead) is Barbara Millicent Roberts. This is not recent, the name was introduced in the early books in the 1960s and has been used consistently in books and films. The 2023 film just affirms this fact. Please return the characters full name to the lead sentence, where alternate names usually appear on Wikipedia. Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:58, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This article is mainly about the doll and its accessories. These are always sold by Mattel under the Barbie brand. Barbara Millicent Roberts is a fictional character who appears in books and films based on the doll. This is something that needs to made clear right from the start. Previous wording has conflated the two, leading to confusion.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 14:40, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There is, as far as I know, not a separate article on the character BMR, so this is the page where that would go. It already has in-universe information and a section, so adding her full name to the lead paragraph just serves to summarize what is already contained in the article and infobox. The cat's already out of the bag with configuring the doll and the character, so unless a separate page is written maybe consider adding the name back in the lead sentence. Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 14:46, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Introducing the topic with her full name conflicts with Wikipedia's MOS:REALWORLD tone. She is known only as Barbie, and introducing her in any other way will cause confusion like it did for me. I arrived at the page and thought "Who is Barbara Millicent Roberts? Am I at the right page?" It should be mentioned in the article but not in the lead. Same with Ken and other Barbie characters. TarkusABtalk/contrib 17:15, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Leads summarize the body of their article. This article details BMR's in-universe existence. That why the lead should include information about the character. BMR is defined in the text, has a full name and a full history, and books, films, video games and the like attest to the in-universe characters that the doll represents. Randy Kryn (talk) 22:50, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The in-universe full name is a minor part of the much larger Barbie story, and doesn't belong in the opening sentence. This isn't an article about the Barbie universe, it's an article about the entire Barbie phenomenon. We should carefully keep in-universe storyline stuff distinct from real-world storyline stuff. We don't mention Clark Kent or Kal-El in the first sentence of Superman, for example; nor Peter Parker in Spider-Man. --jpgordon𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇 23:29, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Kal-El, Clark Kent, and Peter Parkere are mentioned and boldfaced right at the start of the second paragraphs, which seems about right, there and here. Randy Kryn (talk) 23:36, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Not fair comparisons. Peter Parker and Clark Kent are aliases of the superhero characters, and are often represented separately from their superhero aliases. They are both COMMONNAMEs. Beyond the most obsessive Barbie fanatics, Barbie's "full name" is trivia fancruft. This is evident by the fact that secondary sources virtually never mention it. In trying to summarize the history and key facts of the Barbie doll brand in 3-4 paragraphs, Barbie's "full name" does not need to be there. TarkusABtalk/contrib 00:35, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Ianmacm EDIT: When I say "mentioned" and "included", I mean mentioned first think in the lead.

The full names are mentioned in many articles for fictional characters. See the characters with their own articles linked at List of Barbie's friends and family (i.e. Skipper Roberts, Francie Fairchild), List of The Simpsons characters (i.e. Homer Jay Simpson, Bartholomew Jojo "Bart" Simpson), List of characters in the Family Guy franchise (i.e. Peter Löwenbräu Griffin Sr., Stewart Gilligan "Stewie" Griffin), List of SpongeBob SquarePants characters (i.e. Squidward Q. Tentacles, Eugene Harold Krabs). More can be found at Lists of fictional characters by work. MOS:INUNIVERSE mentions not including titles and birth dates of fictional characters, but doesn't explicitly mention full names. I believe they should be included on Barbie and Ken's pages, as they are included on other Barbie character pages, as well as many other fictional character pages. Strugglehouse (talk) 16:05, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Of course the name should be included in the article. The discussion is about its placement. The full name doesn't need to be in the opening sentence, and probably not in the lede at all; we don't go in-universe until the Fictional Biography section, where it's appropriate. --jpgordon𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇 17:05, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Jpgordon I don't think I wordes it correctly. See all the links I gave. The full names are given first thing in the article in many, many articles about fictional characters. Why should the Barbie and Ken articles be different? Strugglehouse (talk) 20:09, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Those are fictional characters, this is a product. Yes there is a fictional universe created around the product, but is not a central part of the nature of these dolls in regards to what reliable sources talk about. Sources talk about Barbie toys as products first and foremost, not as characters. TarkusABtalk/contrib 21:48, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly so. This is not an article about a fictional character, it's an article about a toy. --jpgordon𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇 03:19, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The lead should summarize the page, and Barbie's in-universe identity and media presence is a big part of the page. See Category:Barbie for a directory to Wikipedia's articles on the topic. This page has become about more than the doll, and when its lead summary drifts from the doll that's where Barbie's full in-universe name should be found. Randy Kryn (talk) 06:10, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The problem with putting it in the opening sentence is that gives undue prominence to a name that is hardly ever used for referring to Barbie in real world situations. Aqua did not write a song called "Barbara Millicent Roberts Girl".--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 16:47, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Barbie is the real world doll and brand. Placing its fictional identity in the lede provides undue emphasis on the fictional character and doesn't reflect how sources treat the subject. :3 F4U (they/it) 16:47, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Barbenheimer in See Also section

Why is Barbenheimer in the See Also section? I feel like that should only bee a "See Also" in the article for the Barbie film. It just doesn't seem relevant enough here, especially when the See Also section doesn't even include the film. NowInHD (talk) 16:37, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The film is in the lead paragraph. Barbenheimer is one of the major societal and historical events to occur about Barbie, and has received well over a million views the last 20 days. Seems appropriate for at least a See also mention (or maybe added to the lead?). Randy Kryn (talk) 22:48, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Smells of WP:RECENTISM. Can probably be worked into the article properly in the appropriate section. TarkusABtalk/contrib 23:28, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. Since Barbenheimer falls under Barbie (media franchise), which is already listed in the see also section, i think it is unnecessary to put it in again. Also calling Barbenheimer one of the major societal and historical events to occur about Barbie is, in my opinion, an overstatement. NowInHD (talk) 16:53, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please add, in the section "Role model Barbies" ...

To the sentence that begins ...

"In 2020, the company announced a new release of "shero" dolls, including Paralympic champion Madison de Rozario ..."

the following:

and world four-time sabre champion Olga Kharlan.[1][2]

2603:7000:2101:AA00:68FC:A954:FFAA:2DFD (talk) 06:08, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Done — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 13:00, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Toma Istomina (March 5, 2020). "Barbie launches doll inspired by Ukrainian fencer Olga Kharlan". Kyiv Post.
  2. ^ "Fencing focus: Olga Kharlan". FIE official website. June 30, 2020.

Early Japanese manufacturer

Which Japanese company produced Barbie dolls in the early days? Well, the Japanese Wikipedia's バービー article names Kokusai Boeki ((株)国際貿易) as such. But, as with many other articles in that edition, the article does not provide enough sources.

I know blogs cannot be cited as sources, but this post from Unseen Japan describes how the first Barbie dolls and wardrobes were made in Japan, and it too names Kokusai Boeki. The post additionally mentions a book, the title of which can be literally translated as Barbie and Me, written by Fumiko Miyatsuka who designed Barbie's clothes during that period. Japanese Writer's House has a detailed summary about that book in English. JSH-alive/talk/cont/mail 05:43, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 9 August 2023

In the history section of the article the first sentence of the second pararagraph is "During a trip to Europe in 1956 with her children Barbara and Kenneth, Ruth Handler came across a German toy doll called Bild Lilli." the name Kenneth should link to the page Kenneth Handler. Can someone please add this edit? 2601:806:8300:D0D0:7480:6009:E69F:BEB8 (talk) 21:18, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Pinchme123 (talk) 21:36, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Top (toy sales info)

Regarding this

"In 2020, Mattel sold $1.35 billion worth of Barbie dolls and accessories, and this was their best sales growth in two decades. This is an increase from the $950 million the brand sold during 2017."

Can this be removed? The Bloomberg source cites Mattel's annual reports but I can't find where this is info is mentioned in those reports. Timur9008 (talk) 14:38, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

User:Paper9oll What do you think? Timur9008 (talk) 13:03, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

the doll of the judge is so important it requires a mention in the lede section

regarding this reversion: the state judiciary is incredibly relevant in the context of women’s history and at least two cast members (Ana Cruz Kayne[1] and America Ferrera[2]) of the 2023 film have publicly discussed the depiction of women in the judiciary in the Barbie franchise and its relationship to the Roe v. Wade and Dobbs v. Jackson decisions. in my view, this merits a mention at the minimum. isadora of ibiza (talk) 21:51, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ "Supreme Court Justice Barbie Says It's 'So Important' to Talk About Abortion 1 Year After Roe v. Wade Decision (Exclusive)". The Messenger. Retrieved 14 October 2023.
  2. ^ "I would take the all female Supreme Court". Retrieved 14 October 2023.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Barbie&oldid=1180159742"