Talk:American Girl/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

History

Okay, it seems to me like this section is getting too long. I proposed eliminating the extra details about the individual dolls (the character info, item descriptions, etc.), as that information is repeated below. Perhaps this section should focus more on the history of the company and not on the individual products. Opinions? --Becka 09:57, 27 December 2005 (UTC) I think it's good to have the history of each doll, because it shows the originalty of each doll.--Mary Di Valerio 17:24, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Merge Articles

I believe this page and American Girls Collection should be combined, also a search for American Girl should turn up with this page, shouldn't it? Or at least a disambiguation page? Any thoughts? Loggie 03:57, May 13, 2005 (UTC)

Title

Is it completely pedantic of me to point out that the page should be "American Girl dolls" and not "American girl dolls"? Mhari 05:23, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

It's not pedantic, but how does it get changed? I can't figure it out. Becka 07:08, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

According to Wikipedia naming conventions only proper nouns should have capitalization on the second, third, and so on word. Does 'american girl doll' qualify as a proper noun? Loggie 22:41, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

"American Girl" is the proper name of the toy. From the website: American Girl®, the American Girl logo, American Girl® magazine, and American Girl Place® are registered trademarks of American Girl, LLC. So "doll" would not need to be capitalized. Mhari 00:16, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Okay. Next question is whether American Girl dolls is really the title we want? The article talks about the whole company, not just the dolls. Perhaps American Girl (company), or something similar, would be more appropriate? Loggie 06:07, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

I think we should change the title to "American Girl company", myself. 24.119.47.111 (talk) 18:39, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Pronunciation

Is it really accurate that Kirsten's name is pronounced "Kuursten"?? the more common pronunciation among scandinavians is Keer-sten....is this pronunciation coming directly from the company or what?

Not only that, but "Kuursten" is a weird way to spell it even if it's accurate. Mhari 21:01, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Clerks at store say "Keersten". Becka 07:07, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

--Mary Di Valerio 17:33, 10 September 2007 (UTC)== Addy and other details ==

I removed this from Addy's section:

As Addy's story unfolds, she discovers new and exciting things in "The Free World." She is in the heart of a big city, where her mother works a real paying job as a seamstress. They board in the attic room above the store where Addy's mother works. Addy goes to school and has a kind black teacher-she also gets a new best friend called Sara.

Addy and her mother were forced to leave their baby girl behind-all Addy can think about is seeing her again, along with her brother and her father. She hopes she will be reunited with them soon.

This captivating, inspiering story about Addy has captured girl's dreams for years, showing them that with a little hope and detirmenation, you can go anywhere.

Even though these details are nice, this is an encyclopedia - not a marketing tool. I don't think that plot details and backstory are appropiate here, just a description of the product and some relevant minor details. Thoughts?

I agree!65.126.173.159 04:21, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Me too! Goodgirldv9898 23:53, 23 February 2007 (UTC) I DON'T AGREE!!!It is only a summary of WHO the doll is.--Mary Di Valerio 17:33, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Unecessary details?

I edited the page to remove unnecessary details from the Limited Edition doll's listings. While interesting, there are other places on the internet to get the details of the collections, and an encyclopedia does not seem like the best place to provide an item-by-item description. Just my opinion - this is already a huge page, and it would be nice to keep it down.

Also, I removed the rumor that the doll for 2005/2006 was supposed to be named 'Julie Andrews.' Belated April Fools, anyone?

And the Bonnie/Bob/Amelia thing is not true.

Personal Comments

The most caring parents for these dolls are Madalyn and Noelle Geuke.

I removed this from the article. It seems like a lot of these personal notes are popping up on the page lately. They're not appropriate for the article.

I removed this personal comment this morning:

"Yes, American Girl dolls are expensive, but they are perfectly exquitise and the finest quality. While many well- loved dolls soon fall apary, I myself have a Samantha doll, have had her a long time, and she's still in perfect shape. AG is truly a special treasure."--216.162.194.156 14:49, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Best Friends

I edited out the information about the best friends and locations listed at the end of each doll's section. Kaya, Josefina, Kirsten, Addy, and Kit do not have confirmed "best friend" dolls, and Molly's companion doll Emily is not her best friend in the stories and is only in one book. The names given were pure speculation. --Nethilia 03:30, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

But wait, Kirsten's friend Marta died. 68.40.46.110 20:54, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Addy

I am looking for an old catalog to support me, but I am certain that the first run of Addy dolls was done using the original face mold - i.e. the mold that Kirsten, Samantha and Molly shared.

I own an Addy doll and my cousin has a Molly doll. I can mentally compare them and they are different. Sorry, you only had a catalog, I had REAL visual aid.

When did you get the doll? Was it in 1993, the first run of dolls, or later? Becuase if it was later then you have one with the new facial mold. --Becka 16:34, 3 August 2006 (UTC)BeckaJo

Wait, sorry, I acidentally read it wrong. I thought you meant the NEW mold.

Molly picture

I don't think that the Molly picture is necessary because none of the other dolls get pictures. Plus it is not accurate since Molly is supposed to have braids and glasses and she doesn't in the picture. Comments? loulou 04:26, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Well, yeah. It's nice to have the pictures, but perhaps we should look for official AG images that are available for public use rather than fan-provided images.

That could work. So should we remove the picture? loulou 17:26, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Links in Article

There is no reason to remove the fan sites linked in the article; they are not taking away anything from the article itself. The sites are not "fake". --Nethilia 05:52, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

The "Portraits of American Girlhood" link no longer works; the domain seems to be for sale. Updated the American Girl Fans forum internet address. Moved Guide to Collecting American Girl to the links section. Did the same with American Girl Playthings but added info to mention that the site is a collector resource and forum. Felt that since neither is mentioned in the article and no information or images seem to be taken from either site that they should be moved to links. --thanx2mj 28 Jan 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thanx2mj (talk • contribs) 05:12, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

American Girl Club

I noticed that there isn't a section/page/anything for the (now defunct) American Girl Club. I'd add it, but I really don't know much about it besides what I've already said. Plus, does anyone happen to know what happened to necessitate the closure of the club? --Anoma lee 07:48, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

I was a member of the club, so my mom got an e-mail that said why it closed. If I remember correctly, they weren't making enough money.

Lindsey and Kailey?

"The first dolls — Samantha, Kirsten, Molly — Felicity, Kit, Lindsey & Kailey..." (in the American Girl Collection Dolls section) As far as I'm aware there isn't and never has been dolls called Lindsey or Kailey (not counting JLY dolls). Delete?--Anoma lee 05:05, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Lindsey and Kailey are the first two dolls of the year. I see no reason to remove them from the first section. Nethilia 06:02, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

It just implies that the were part of the first group of dolls, ever. It might be more fitting to add another sentence saying otherwise.--Anoma lee 08:04, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Maybe the descriptions of the individual Girls of the Year should mention which face mold they use. But I don't think that they belong up in the first section, because it's chronologically out of order. Becka 05:51, 20 September 2006 (UTC)RJWestBecka 05:51, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Kit's Movie

I am getting EXTREMELY annoyed at whoever keeps deleting my contributions about Kit's movie. I assure you this is real news and deserves to be on the page. I would like to propose a permanent "Kit's Movie" subcategory under "Movies" and include some information about it under Kit's description. Please stop deleting my contributions!

I have not deleted your contributions, and the minimal information about the movie (i.e. the production company, screenwriter and planned appearance in theaters) seems appropriate. But, in a related issue, I'm not so sure that Ruthie should be listed. Just because her name is trademarked does not mean she's going to be produced; even though she'd make sense in the context of Kit's stories is not a promise. It would have made more sense to have Linda or Susan for Molly, after all...Becka 00:49, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

I've edited the Ruthie section to show that she is merely speculated, not confirmed. It's better on Wikipedia to only give what is confirmed to be coming, not things that are speculated or rumored to be coming out. --Nethilia 15:31, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

An idea to reduce page length

How about the American Girl (company) page contains content about the history of the company, controversy, and news, but there are links to OTHER wiki pages about AG? For instance: "Kaya" leads to info about Kaya, "Felicity Merriman" leads to info about Felicity, etc... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.194.82.241 (talk) 20:52, 10 October 2006

In the interest of keeping things short and in line with Wiki's standards, I've removed a lot the details about Nicki, etc. from the pages. This is an encyclopedia and that much detail seems inappropriate. I'm putting the Nicki information here, however, because until she's released I realize people are curious.
"Nothing is known or confirmed about her appearance, though there is speculation that she has long curly hair that is dark brown or red. Nicki will have two books, Nicki and Thanks to Nicki. She will be the first doll of the year to have two books about her. The books are said to have two different release dates.
Girls will love meeting Nicki, the Girl of the Year 2007! Nicki Fleming is a natural with animals. When the chance to train a serivce dog comes up, she just can't say "no," even if it means taking on more responsibility and having to give up some of the things she loves doing. When Sprocket the puppy turns out to be a handful, Nicki has to muster all of her compassion to continue his training. She knows that one day Sprocket will make someone else's life better--and that makes all the difference. The "True Story" section at the back of the book focuses on real girls who have experience training service dogs.
Nicki's story continues, with a second book about the Girl of the Year 2007. Ten-year-old Nicki Fleming has been having a busy summer on her Colorado ranch. When she isn't training Sprocket to be a service dog, she's helping her mother, who is expecting twins soon. Yet Nicki is dreading the fall--that's when Sprocket will have to leave for more training and eventual placement with a person with special needs. The beginning of the school year also means she's stuck in the middle--caught between her two best friends, Kris and Becca, who can't seem to get along. Can Nicki find a way to let Sprocket go and keep both of her good friends close? The "True Story" section at the back of the book focuses on real girls who have experience training service dogs.
She follows the same standard mold for the other caucasian dolls. She has long brown hair in tight curls similar to GT26. The hair flows down to her butt. She has blue eyes and freckles. She is reported to look just like 23 but longer.
Her meet outfit is a white long sleeved shirt with ruffles. She is wearing a skirt that is a teal or light blue with some embroidered design on it. She also comes with some suede or leather cowboy style boots and a leather belt. Her necklace is almost like a teal coloured stone necklace....the name is beyond me right now.....sorry.
She has two other outfits. One is a pink patterned party dress. The other outfit is a pair of pants, a long sleeved tee and a pair of chaps.
OK so then we have her pets....yes PETS. One is her dog. I am told it is like a burmese or st. bernard "type" looking dog. At least those are the colourings. Then she will also get a horse. The horse is a grey/ brown with dark hair either black or deep brown.
An illustrtation of Nicki on her first book can be found at www.amazon.com. It is of the above desciption of her in her meet outfit."
—Preceding unsigned comment added by RJWest (talk • contribs) 15:54, 9 November 2006

Years for Best Friends

While it seems strange that the years for Nellie and Elizabeth are not the same as their "best friends" Elizabeth's book is not set the same time as Felicity's (it says 1775 on the cover) and neither is Nellie's (1906). Emily's is the only one that is in her main character's "year."The core six books cover a span of about two years; the four at the end is generally the year the Meet book is set. I've edited the main part to discuss the span of years. --Nethilia 06:25, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Molly - Movie link

For some reason the link around the word "Movie" for Molly; An American Girl doesn't work.

Edits about younger girl that was turned away at AG Place

Lately, I have seen two edits adding in a post that links to a blog where a young girl was allegedly turned away violently from the salon for asking the salon to do the hair of a non-American Girl doll. Having read this story on the blog, I think there are a lot of holes in the story and doubt the authenticity of the event. Until this story is verified by more than a single sensational blog post, I do not feel that this addition to the page is anything but hearsay/mob mentality and that it should not become part of the page officially. So that others can see and thus analyze, I will link it here:

http://oneofthosehorriblemoms.blogspot.com/2007/03/fake-out.html

As for false advertising: nothing on the website says that American Girl Place does anything for any non-American Girl doll anywhere on the site. Nethilia 16:35, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree, and feel that if anywhere, it should be placed under critism. Not on the external links.--Nelliebellie 07:20, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

I think we should put it on critism, if anything, but I can't say that the story is true. 71.48.131.246 00:59, 9 April 2007 (UTC)mollybrown95

AG*Minis

Someone should compose a short paragraph about the AG*Minis line under Other Product Lines of Note. It had a wider breadth than Girls of Many Lands, and lasted longer, as well. Possibly even had a longer selling run that Hopscotch Hill, though I'm not sure. Angel the Techrat 05:30, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

I've added one to the pages. Nethilia 04:54, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

No need for Fiction modifications

The whole page clearly says that every character named on the page is in a book or is a doll at some point in the pages, such as mentioning that Felicity was removed from catalogs. I do not think that there needs to be a tag about the page not lining up with fiction, as all the pictures are of dolls and not of actors or people. Adding notes to each character that she is fictional, especially when they don't have their own pages, seems superfluous. Nethilia 07:23, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

magazine/books

shouldn't this article mention the american girl magazine and the vast array of american girl books?

Yes. It should. Unfortunately, I think what prevents anyone from doing so are two issues:

- - The titles for the majority of the historical character books are, frankly, repetative. The same title with an interchangeable [name here]. I imagine others are having as much trouble as I when I've tried to concider how to make that look in any way encyclopedic. Do so with extremely short book synopsis would be preferable, but would bloat the article, and I don't know anyone that even has enough of the books to address that route. But if someone did, I would recomend branching it off into a different page.
  - Pleastant Company has published many books in the American Girl of Today/Just Like You line or associated with it.. To be blunt, where does one stop in deciding which of these are noteable? There is even an entire series, with many books, that all revolve around one modern character who's name escapes me at this time, but who was never given a doll. (Though I understand some view her as the "inspiration" for the Girl of the Year idea.)

Angel the Techrat 00:34, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

LE Girl of 2008 Speculation

I've removed text describing "Mia" as the 2008 limited edition girl of the year. There has been no official announcement for the 2008 girl, and those who have seen a prototype or who have inside information aren't allowed to talk much about her. Misspadfoot 03:40, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:American girl dolls logo.jpg

Image:American girl dolls logo.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:52, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

First computer game? Not so

In the portion on Julie, the 1974 doll, it said she was the star of "the only American Girl computer game." However, I remember from when I was younger and had the dolls, there was an American Girl game that allowed girls to write their own plays starring the dolls and other characters in their books; I cannot remember the name of the game. I believe there were others as well, although none in particular come to mind. So her game is not the only AG computer game, even if it is the only one still available. I edited this portion to say that Julie was the only doll with her own game. 24.192.248.238 (talk) 01:42, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, this was me, I wasn't logged in at the time Beggarsbanquet (talk) 01:42, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

A new character

I heard the american girl company is already making a new historical character and the only thing that the their website said is that her name is Megan duger. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.80.106.105 (talk) 22:17, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Another new historical character

I heard the american girl company is already making a new historical character and the only thing that the their website said is that her name is Megan duger. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.80.106.105 (talk) 22:20, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

You can write this a million and one times, honey, but it is not true and your fantasies do not belong on the Wiki. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.195.170.57 (talk) 02:46, 20 March 2008 (UTC) Yeah well the american girl company and the other historical characters are made up as well so i dont see the point of your unusual response. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.80.106.105 (talk) 19:55, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Do you have the link to the website?--Hailey 20:12, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

To what website?

The webiste with the information--Hailey 14:53, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

You know what i made the whole thing up they are not making another character and i am sorry if i caused any trouble —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.80.106.105 (talk) 22:50, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Kits Movie title

Why did they change the movie title from Kit kittredge:an american girl mystery to kit kittredge:an american girl. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.80.106.105 (talk) 12:34, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Another Movie

Does anyone know if there will be another movie made next year in 2009 after kit`s movie ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.80.106.105 (talk) 11:21, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Article size

This article is almost twice as big as the nominal maximum (on basis of size alone) of 32Kbytes, and the 49 lines in the Table of Contents suggest that making only two articles out of this one would still leave too many subtopics to serve the reader's needs well.
The discussion in the section #An idea to reduce page length, over 18 months ago, quickly drifted off that topic (or maybe its section got taken over by a colleague who simply had no idea how to start a new section), without any progress toward that goal.
A more concrete approach similar to that one, well established as effective here at WP, can be seen by looking at really big topics like World War II. Without refreshing myself about that structure, let me just say that at least in the abstract you could subdivide that war by theaters, by periods (probably drawing period boundaries when major belligerents entered or left the war), or by nation, discussing in each article what process brought it into the war (or kept it out -- the underground fortresses of Switzerland deserve discussion), what it did and what happened to it. In fact, i can imagine having three series of articles: a series of articles that each cover a theater, another with each covering a period, and a third with each covering a country. That implies mentioning most events more than once, but probably discussing different aspects or causes and effects of the same event in different articles.
In the American Girl family of articles, it may be worth covering a doll, book, or film once in an article on the character, and once in an article on the evolution of the doll line, book line, or film line that it is part of.
--Jerzy•t 07:14, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Title (revisited)

The title suggested at #Title at the end of 2005 (and at some point implemented) was not a stupid one, but not one that serves users very well either. American Girl (company) suggests an article focused on ownership, strategy, market share, profitability, and intellectual property. There is some of that, and it is true that all the material does relate to the company, even tho most of it does focuses not on the company but on its products and services. I'm making a BOLD judgment that the unrelated film and musical works are subordinate meanings of the phrase at this point, and that American Girl can be the overarching article embracing the product lines, services, individual products, and company history (tho as i've implied in the previous section, some kind of subdivision is needed, so subtopics can be briefly covered in the overarching article and also covered in full detail in the subtopic article)s.
History of the business aspects i mentioned above may be worth breaking out as something like American Girl (company) or History of the American Girl company or American Girl business line (which should also be clearer about whether there is an American Girl business unit of Mattel, a trademark shared about its toy, book, periodical, and film business units, or something else).
I'm not certain i've hit on the right title, but i'm satisfied that i've given the title more consideration than it's previously gotten, and closer to what it deserves. It may take an admin if there's reason to move it back, but more likely, further insights will be implementable without admin help as they arise. So please treat my renaming as being as tentative as i regard it.
--Jerzy•t 07:14, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

American Girl Dolls Wiki

I have added a link to the American Girl Dolls Wiki, which can be found here: http://americangirl.wikia.com/ I hope that this fits as a specific wiki about this topic. Thanks. --Nethilia (talk) 07:13, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

I'd like to add that this is not like Wikipedia, as this wiki is to go into more depth about the dolls, clothing, books, and characters than the Wikipedia article. --Nethilia (talk) 07:16, 16 August 2008 (UTC)