Talk:Barbie/Archive 1

message: I thought this was spam; removing to talk page until someone more knowledgeable can confirm it. Taken from the year 1991 on the Timeline.  "Gay Parisien Barbie doll is marketed." --Mechcozmo 22:46, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Here is a picture of the Gay Parisien Barbie (yes, it's for sale, but it's the only link I can find).  It is referring to the city. -Shannernanner 09:08, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Gay Parisiean

message: I think it should be mentioned that the underwear-shaped textured pattern many Barbie body molds feature is sometimes compared to a strange sexually transmitted disease; however, I'm not sure how to word this in an encyclopedic fashion.
That's what usually happens when a subject has absolutely no merit whatsoever. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.187.189.139 (talk • contribs) 11:47, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  STD controversy 

message: The trouble with most comparisons of Barbie's dimensions to those of real women is that they never quote the actual dimensions of the Barbie dolls themselves, but only what selected dimensions would be when scaled up to 'life-size'.  (In this article for instance it states, "in real life she would be towering over most men and have an impossible breast size".)  
Whilst I understand the intention of such descriptions is to try to combat the problem of poor self-image and it's related disorders, I don't agree with the way the data is presented in an attempt to support the intentions, (as in my opinion, the end does not justify the means).  I also think that attempting to present the data in this way actually detracts from its impact and relevance.   Furthermore, such descriptions are meaningless unless at least one actual dimension of the doll is given as a base reference for scaling.  We might as well say Barbie would be 10 or a 100 ft tall, as it completely depends on what scale we adopt, which in turn completely depends on which particular dimension we choose to use to determine our scale factor.
Clearly if we chose to use a scale based on comparisons of the height of the Barbie doll to the height of 'real-life' women, then she would not be towering over most men, nor have an impossible breast size.  She would, however, almost certainly have hip and waist measurements smaller than the average.
Given that her male companion doll, Ken, is slightly taller than the Barbie doll, it would seem reasonable to assume a 'real-life' Barbie would be taller than the average.  Given the dolls are American, we could reasonably assume Ken is over 6 ft.  Lets us therefore assume Ken to be around 6 ft 6.  This would make Barbie around 6 ft herself, which is admittedly tall for a woman, but not unusual for models for instance, (a point I will come back to).
Approximate measurements taken from a randomly sampled Barbie doll, (one of my daughter's), were 29.5 cm tall, 13.5 cm bust, 8.5 cm waist and 12.5 cm hips.  If we assume the 'real-life' Barbie to be 6 ft, then this gives a scale factor of approximately 2.44 inches/cm.  This gives bust, waist and hip measurements of approximately 33, 20.75 and 30.5 inches, respectively.
When looked at this way, the most striking measurement is not her height or bust, but her hips, which are extremely narrow, but does make the 'real-life' Barbie very thin all round.  This is, however, only a reflection of the ideal promoted by the fashion industry, which strives to find models who are both very tall, yet naturally slender, small busted and narrow hipped, in order to make the clothes the models wear 'hang better'.  Nonetheless, if given the dimensions as I have described, most people would regard this as extremely thin for anyone, but perhaps even more so in one so tall.
Most people have no or very little experience with individuals who are over 7 ft tall, and so such descriptions fail to register in any meaningful way with most people.  Individuals of 6 ft are far more common, and fit a frame of reference people are used to dealing in, and so can much more readily appreciate the slimness of the other dimensions, which surely is the point.
:That's my issue too, so I deleted those references, but a rewrite illustrating this issue would be a good idea. Hackwrench 22:38, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Totally Harie Barbie was called "Ultra Hair Barbie" outside the US. Olivix 12:53, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comparisons of Barbie's dimensions to those of real women. 

message: In my effort to merge the now-deleted list from the article Gay icon to the Gay icons category, I have added this page to the category. I engaged in this effort as a "human script", adding everyone from the list to the category, bypassing the fact-checking stage. That is what I am relying on you to do. Please check the article Gay icon and make a judgment as to whether this person or group fits the category. By distributing this task from the regular editors of one article to the regular editors of several articles, I believe that the task of fact-checking this information can be expedited. Thank you very much. Philwelch 20:06, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gay Icon Project 

message: As with much on this page, it's hard to tell whether an entry is serious.  Moved this anonymous entry for verification.  WBardwin 20:38, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: 2004: Barbie portrait's the characters from the popular Lord of the Rings triology. You can now own your very own Legolas! There are also dolls portraying Queen Elizabeth I of England, two Versace-Barbies, Barbie as Catwoman and a Diana Ross Barbie.
Yes, there is definitely a Legolas and Barbie as Catwoman.  Diana
Yes, this information was correct, but the way it was worded is obviously inapporpriate for an encyclopedia. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by User9099 (talk • contribs) 12:53, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  2004 Editions 

message: It's a shame that we do not have a single picture of a "Barbie" in the whole article. WB 22:46, Jun 23, 2005 (UTC)
:There is one now. --βjweþþ (talk) 19:59, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture 

message: I deleted the section Values In Design for POV reasons.  If you want to repost, please give sources and expand.  The entry read:
Barbie dolls tend to reify existing gender categories.  Barbie dolls support values of playfullness and development of imagination
- Haunti 17:17, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Values In Design

message: Double prefixes are deprecated. She should be named "Barbara Ten-Micro Roberts". — JIP | Talk 06:19, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Barbie's name 

message: "The European countries are highly over-represented"
Not sure I understand or agree with that comment, it seems to be POV to me 
Liss 16:09, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disputed comment 

message: I'm I alone in thinking this entire article reads like and advertisement for Mattel?
';  /;  ;.'/  ,,  ;[]]\  ==-[
:Following a link from a page about fictional characters from The Simpsons, I wanted to read about the Teen Talk Barbie controversy. Anyway, I read down the controversy section and noticed that the last paragraph seemed very much like an advertisement or a very over-zealous fan who seemed to inject personal affection for Mattel products into the article. Rmsharpe 04:11, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Unfortunately, that's what happens when a subject is so vehemently loved by some and hated by others. It's impossible to keep POV out of this article; every time it's edited to remove POV statements, someone comes along and adds the same types of statements back in. Until this issue can be resolved somehow, people using this article as a reference are doing themselves and their audience a disservice. Olivix 13:00, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Advert

message: I just reverted the page from some vandalism by 212.219.82.37. Someone can decide whether to ban this IP or not. --Vegalabs 14:49, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism 

message: On an episode of Who Wants To Be A Millionaire, Kevin Nealon received the question: In 1968, Mattel introduced the first African-American doll to its "Barbie" line with a doll named what? The answer (which he got wrong) was Christie. This article, however, says the first African-American doll debuted in 1967, so I'll leave this info out of the article until someone can confirm it. - Brian Kendig 02:01, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  First African-American doll? 

message: Discussion of Barbie's physical design should not go under controversies, nor mingled with the body image. Hackwrench 22:58, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Physical 

message: NYTimes reported that the Teen Talk Barbie phrase was math class is tough not  math is hard.   
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E0CE7DE103AF932A15753C1A964958260
: In other news, Ken Doll was heard to have uttered "Cleaning the stairs is HARD!"Flame-retarding disclaimer: I cleaned the stairs today. It IS hard.Beanluc 23:58, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  math class is tough 

message: Though comparisons with real women are contentious and beside the point, for this is a doll, the comparisons with the features, hair, and proportions of Walt Disney's Sleeping Beauty, which debuted the same year !1959), are too striking not to be noted in the article. To draw any conclusions about the obvious similarity might risk Wikipedian ideas of "Original Research". --Wetman 01:06, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comparisons of Barbie with Disney's 'Sleeping Beauty 

message: The article has been given a cleanup as it had become longer than preferable under Wikipedia guidelines.  Barbie is such a large subject that it is not practical to list everything that has ever been said about her, and the article has to stay within a length that is of interest to the general reader.  Please bear this in mind when editing the page.  --Ianmacm 17:12, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Text cleanup

message: Mattel did not "widen Barbie's waist" in response to criticism. The waist shape was changed to allow the doll to wear more up do date clothing, particularly low-rise pants. (The previous body couldn't accomodate these types of clothing.) And although the waist was wider from side to side, the circumfrence was almost the same. I have corrected similar statements added to this entry several times in the past but it is always eventually rewritten to include the same misinformation, so it doesn't seem like there's much point in doing it again. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.187.189.139 (talk • contribs) 11:54, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Misinformation about Barbie's Waist

message: We should have a list of all Barbie's jobs.. For example, her first job was as a fashion model. Lil Flip246 00:11, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Careers 

message: Some of the material from the timeline has been moved to the main text as suggested.  The timeline is not ideal but it does contain some useful information.--Ianmacm 15:23, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Text edit

message: It would be a pity to have to semi-protect this page, but at the moment it is rarely up for 24 hours without users (usually unregistered) adding nonsense or blanking the page.  If the current rate of disruption continues, semi-protection is an option that may need to be looked at.  The Bratz page was semi-protected a while ago for the same reason.--Ianmacm 07:19, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Vandalism

message: By the way, can we write to the article about a study, which says little British girls brutally destroy Barbie dolls. The study's source is here. Any thoughts? 86.101.211.226 19:23 CET, 3 November 2006
This is also covered on the BBC website at .  I'll look at putting it into the article.--Ianmacm 19:22, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: December 2005's Study

message: The edit to the article which added this link  seems to be bordering on linkspam as it is too commercial.  I have left it in for the time being because it contains a picture of the 1959 Barbie in her zebra striped swimsuit, which due to copyright reasons is not featured in the article.  Eagle-eyed readers of  may notice that the text is substantially borrowed from the Wikipedia article Barbie.--Ianmacm 20:48, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I see the section is gone but the link remains.  Perhaps it should be accompanied by text similar to the following: "The production run of more recent Barbies is tied to a color-coded "tier" system of collectibility. However, other factors such as controversy and recalls may also affect a particular doll's market value." That would distinguish the subject of dolls issued as collectibles from the subject of collecting vintage ones. (If that second sentence caveat is included, it needs a citation, perhaps to something about the tattoo and piercing controversies of several years back.) Also, it might be nice to mention in passing the different "eras" identified in Barbie collecting (vintage, mod, etc.) Karen | Talk | contribs 21:36, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree completely.  It should be possible to give a very brief overview of subject of Barbie collecting (age and rarity vs. marketing strategy, areas of specialization, etc.) without discussing specific ranges of dolls.  A few sentences should suffice to give the reader a general idea of the field without getting bogged down in details. Karen | Talk | contribs 23:37, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Barbie and the color tier system

message: This was rv'ed from the article on 22 November 2006, largely for reasons of keeping the article's length down:
* In May 1997 Mattel introduced Share a Smile Becky a doll in a hot pink wheelchair.  Unfortuantely, the Barbie Dream House was not hadicapped accessible.  Becky couldn't fit through the door or in the elevator.
As mentioned previously, the current version of the article is trying to avoid long lists, but the above information may be put back if other users regard it as important enough to be in the main article. --Ianmacm 19:36, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I did a copyedit on this, but was sidetracked before posting it, by which time you had reverted.  It seems at least vaguely notable, and at least it's sourced, so I'll put it back in for now. But if someone takes it out a second time I won't gripe about it. Karen | Talk | contribs 19:40, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Share a Smile Becky