Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Barbie's careers/archive1

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was archived by PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 1 November 2022 (UTC) [1].[reply]

Barbie's careers

Barbie's careers (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

• Featured list candidates/Barbie's careers/archive1

Nominator(s): Antihistoriaster (talk) 21:02, 1 August 2022 (UTC)Antihistoriaster[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because it is comprehensive, thoroughly documented, well-organized and, to me at least, pretty fascinating as a window into culture and toy history.

Antihistoriaster (talk) 21:02, 1 August 2022 (UTC)Antihistoriaster[reply]

Comments from Lil-Unique1

• Oppose - Clearly this has taken a lot of time, well done on your dedication and committment. I do have some concerns though. The article lacks context, it is in essence an index of jobs that Barbie has had. I also have trouble with that very terminology. Is it about the doll or about the character as she has appeared in anime/Tv/movies? If its about the doll, then dolls do not have professions people do. Dolls are inanimate objects. Therefore is this not about the costumes/outfits and accessories Barbie comes with? as e.g. Barbie dressed as a doctor NOT Barbie as a doctor. All of that aside, I don't think it passes our quality standards either:

1. Barbie's Careers sounds awkward. Is there a better title?
2. Does this pass
   significant coverage
   ?
3. At the moment, almost everything is matter of fact - primary sources saying there's a doctor barbie etc. but no context.
4. The second paragraph is one sentence and reads According to Mattel, Barbie has had over 200 careers, recently including more STEM fields. The word recently is without context, recently according to when?
5. Reference one (The Times article) is missing information like its author etc.
6. Reference five Barbie.mattel.com/shop is a
   WP:VENDOR
   source which are frowned upon
7. What makes Barbiedb.com a reliable source? There's no editorial information and its borderline
   WP:VENDOR
   / akin to eBay?
8. Is there not an over-reliance on
   WP:PRIMARY
   sources? Where its not Barbiedb.com, its all almost Mattel Global Consumer, which is clearly related to the topic very close.
9. None of the current sources are archived.

Unless I've missed a notability guideline that applies specifically to toys, its my understanding that the

Thank you for your feedback! There are a couple of things I'm confused about. When you say "primary sources saying there's a doctor barbie etc. but no context.", what do you mean by context in this sense? Like, more information on why the doll exists, or what sort of context are you looking for? Same with when you say the article overall lacks context, I guess I'm not sure what sort of context you mean. I suppose I'm also confused about why Mattel would be a bad source when the material at hand is about types of careers Barbie has been portrayed as having (I do think "List of careers Barbie has been portrayed as having" would be a better title, fwiw), wouldn't it be good to directly cite the manufacturer? Antihistoriaster (talk) 18:12, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

primary sources

are original materials that are close to an event, and are often accounts written by people who are directly involved. Mattel are the makers of Barbie so of course they will cover their own products. What has not been established is why the careers of Barbie are of notability beyond the fact they exist. That would require independent third party sources.

In terms of context, just because something exists doesn't mean its notable to be written about,

WP:NLIST

says Notability guidelines also apply to the creation of stand-alone lists and tables. Notability of lists (whether titled as "List of Xs" or "Xs") is based on the group. One accepted reason why a list topic is considered notable is if it has been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources, per the above guidelines; notable list topics are appropriate for a stand-alone list. - although you could argue that Barbie having STEM careers has received independent coverage, NLIST goes on to say Because the group or set is notable, the individual items in the list do not need to be independently notable, although editors may, at their discretion, choose to limit large lists by only including entries for independently notable items or those with Wikipedia articles.

In a nutshell, Wikipedia does not allow content to be sourced from Vendors, and if a list or article only exists to be an index of all of the entries in a topic then it probably isn't notable. It's certainly not a FL in my eyes to be sourced almost entirely from Primary sources related to the topic, and certainly not Barbiedb.com which is not a

reliable source. >> Lil-unique1 (talk) — 15:26, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

• Tables need captions, which allow screen reader software to jump straight to named tables without having to read out all of the text before it each time. Visual captions can be added by putting |+ caption_text as the first line of the table code; if that caption would duplicate a nearby section header, you can make it screen-reader-only by putting |+ {{sronly|caption_text}} instead.
• Tables need column scopes for all column header cells, which in combination with row scopes lets screen reader software accurately determine and read out the headers for each cell of a data table. Column scopes can be added by adding !scope=col to each header cell, e.g. !Year becomes !scope=col | Year. If the cell spans multiple columns with a colspan, then use !scope=colgroup instead.
• Tables need row scopes on the "primary" column for each row, which in combination with column scopes lets screen reader software accurately determine and read out the headers for each cell of a data table. Row scopes can be added by adding !scope=row to each primary cell, e.g. |1959 becomes !scope=row |1959. If the cell spans multiple rows with a colspan, then use !scope=rowgroup instead.
• Please see
  MOS:DTAB for example table code if this isn't clear. I don't return to these reviews until the nomination is ready to close, so ping me if you have any questions. --PresN 18:19, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply
  ]

There's been no action taken on the oppose in two months, no other responses, and the nominator has not edited since their last comment here. Closing this nomination; feel free to renominate if the independent sourcing issues are resolved in the future. --PresN 14:18, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Closing note: This
  WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot
  goes through.