Talk:Ball-jointed doll

Sources for which dolls/companies are notable
Per discussion above, I'm attempting to find WP:SECONDARY WP:Reliable sources to decide which companies are WP:Notable enough to be included. (Note that my info on which doll types are included in the BJD Orbyrarium book comes from this thread, particularly these posts: , since I don't own the book myself, so if something is wrong, please correct me. ShojoBeat refers to the article in the June 2007 issue of ShojoBeat.)
 * Super Dollfie, featured in BJD Orbyrarium, Haute Doll, etc etc
 * Unoa, featured in BJD Orbyrarium, Dollybird, probably more
 * Delf/Fairyland-whatever-you-wanna-call them, featured in BJD Orbyrarium, mentioned in ShojoBeat
 * Dollshe, featured prominently in BJD Orbyrarium (interview with creator)
 * Elfdoll, featured in LA Weekly and BJD Orbyrarium, also mentioned in ShojoBeat
 * Custom House, featured in BJD Orbyrarium and the Doll Master movie
 * D.I.M, mentioned in ShojoBeat
 * D.O.D., featured in BJD Orbyrarium
 * Dollzone, mentioned in this World Journal article
 * Obitsu, mentioned in ShojoBeat

Also in reliable sources but not in this article (yet?)
 * Liebchen (BJD Orbyrarium)
 * Hypermaniac (BJD Orbyrarium)
 * Souldoll (BJD Orbyrarium)
 * Narae/Narin (ShojoBeat)
 * Angel Devil Dolls (ShojoBeat)

Based on Policy I think only doll lines/companies should be included that have at least been mentioned in one reliable secondary source, ie, a book, magazine or newspaper that is published indepentently. Siawase (talk) 19:07, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Apparently there is a list of 49 companies in the BJD Orbyrarium book. I would like to suggest that 1) it would not be a good idea to include all 49 companies in this article, and 2) for WP:WEIGHTing of companies/lines for inclusion in this article, only coverage in the book outside of the list should be considered.
 * Basically, I suggest that if the only mention of a company that exist in WP:Reliable sources is in the Orbyrarium list, it should not be included in this article. Siawase (talk) 11:25, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Please place image
I thought there was a "mechanics" section, but there isn't. Please place this where you like. I was actually thinking of a dual lede image because of the article name, but I'm not sure that would look right. You decide. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 19:41, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi, what about these? Stolen Vehicle (talk) 10:31, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

There is no mechanics section because the mechanics and joints of BJDs is not something reliable sources really get into from what I've seen. Despite the name, the joints are not really what BJDs are "about." Also, I do think the German bisque doll image already in the article shows the joints? Without sources to write up some relevant prose, it might be a bit WP:UNDUE to add images specifically focusing on the joints. Siawase (talk) 12:52, 9 July 2013 (UTC)


 * @ Siawase The first statment in this article is, "A ball-jointed doll is any doll that is articulated with ball and socket joints." I am not trying to be antagonistic here but maybe the article is becoming a bit bias. Stolen Vehicle (talk) 13:19, 9 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Stolen Vehicle: Yeah, but unfortunately even that is unsourced and (as the lead is prone to) a bit of an oversimplification and not really something to build on. I'm not sure what you mean by "bias." Siawase (talk) 13:34, 9 July 2013 (UTC)


 * The name of the article Ball-jointed doll is perhaps inappropriate then. Stolen Vehicle (talk) 13:43, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
 * How about Articulated doll Stolen Vehicle (talk) 13:57, 9 July 2013 (UTC)


 * It is the appropriate name as per WP:COMMONNAME as this is how these dolls are referred to in reliable sources. And I take it back, it's not entirely unsourced, but perhaps a bit of a poor summary of this ref:. In a nutshell: there are other dolls that use ball joints, but dolls that are defined as "ball-jointed dolls" are a specific type of doll (with a few exceptions, what is covered in this article under "Modern Asian BJDs") Whereas say, the mannequin image you posted, while it has ball joints, it is referred to as a mannequin, or the bisque doll image in the article, that is referred to as a bisque doll even though it has a ball jointed body. Siawase (talk) 13:57, 9 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Oh ok, I don't know anything about this area, I was just sort of thinking scientifically and as I remember lots of action figures and also barbie dolls I think, have basic ball and socket joints. I shall leave you to it then. All the best Stolen Vehicle (talk) 14:29, 9 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Yeah, doll definitions can get a bit hairy as they are generally not defined technically, but rather according to how they are sold and marketed. Common plastic dolls/figures may have ball joints (but they often seem to have hinges or something like rod end bearings) that snap together and hold together on their own, but BJDs have a looser ball and socket joint structure that needs an internal string or elastic to hold the parts together. When well crafted this looser structure do a good job of mimicking human joints held together with tendons and muscle, and BJDs move and pose more similar to the human body than dolls with stiffer joints. /WP:OR doll mechanics. Siawase (talk) 15:13, 9 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Good explanation, I think you should incorporate that sort of info somewhere in the article, somehow. Stolen Vehicle (talk) 16:32, 9 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks, wish I could, but without sources it's all just WP:OR. None of the sources I've come across so far delve into it deeper than the article here already does. Siawase (talk) 19:41, 9 July 2013 (UTC)


 * How could the direct description of obvious facts be considered WP:OR?? Stolen Vehicle (talk) 19:55, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Different types of "ball joints"
There are a few different types of joints used in these "ball-jointed" dolls I believe.

The most basic of which consists of a joint like the one displayed in this diagram. --Stolen Vehicle (talk) 10:55, 8 July 2013 (UTC)



Dollfie line
There should be a link to the Dollfie line since Volks also makes the Super Dollfie line. It is a relevant topic. 174.22.13.162 (talk) 16:22, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you for starting a topic for discussing this. This article is about BJDs, I don't really see the need for linking to unrelated products from companies that also make BJDs. Siawase (talk) 16:32, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Submitted by Bella Chen Xu, moving to end of discussion
§Bella Chen Xu (talk) 22:26, 9 March 2014 (UTC)Wikipedia user id：Bella Chen Xu The link I would like to work on: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ball-jointed_doll Proposal: I am a BJD player for more than 3 years. However, I found out there is really little information about BJDs on the Wikipedia page, especially of the part of Asian BJDs. So firstly, I decide to expand short article about the lines and companies of BJDs. I may research and add more than 15 companies and write a brief introduction for each company. Secondly, I will update with new information such as Newbie Guide. I will list a few questions which newcomers may ask and post the answers. Thirdly, I will add several cute or pretty pictures about BJDs since the existing pictures on the Wikipedia page are horrible and may mislead the browsers. Sandbox: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Bella_Chen_Xu/sandbox


 * Hi Bella. Thanks for your offer. I have looked at your proposed edits and I'm afraid that as far as I can tell, you want to add lots of advertising and commercial links which is ABSOLUTELY not allowed on Wikipedia. The edits you describe would be considered WP:PROMOTIONAL, which is not permissible. Also, I do not think you understand the issues with copyright on Wikipedia, where even a picture you have taken of an existing doll might be considered a copyright violation because the doll itself is an object under copyright. Wikipedia is also not a place for "how to" guides or "Newbie Guides" or for questions-and-answers sections. Put such stuff on your own blog or website where it belongs as it will only be removed from Wikipedia if added here. Mabalu (talk) 13:14, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

A very major edit
I'm a bit concerned about this recent edit with the edit summary "...and added additional information about BJD sizes and types...". While plenty of new content was added, it seems that entire sections and many references were removed. Perhaps this edit ought to be done bit by bit. Thoughts? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 20:47, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Yeah, a lot of problems with those edits, deletion of verified/verifiable material without explanation, and addition of material with no sourcing whatsoever, and some that's only sourced to companies themselves, which borders on WP:SPAM. Companies need to have independent sourcing before they're added here, to avoid spamming. I reverted back to the last verified version, so we can discuss what to do here. Siawase (talk) 09:31, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Psst. We may have a problem here. Person keeps adding the same info back in using both ISP and ID. If I revert this time I will be in violation of 3RR so would appreciate a third opinion. Mabalu (talk) 15:48, 7 August 2014 (UTC)


 * I took at look at the sources they used, which are literally the first two google hits when you search for the brand in Korean. One looks like a wiki (ie not a reliable source) and the other (from what I could glean using google translate) appears to be a blog set up by the Seoul Government to promote entrepreneurship ie, not an independent but rather a promotional source. As such I reverted the addition. Siawase (talk) 17:07, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

New post about this article
There are many US doll artists and companies that are notable. The author of the book you use as a source is highly prejudicial, or else you are. These companies are all Asian when there is a thriving contingent here in the USA who need to be sourced and given at least a mention. Frankly, a couple of the companies in your line up are not even in business anymore. I am and several others here in the USA. The main book and the main online forum are both prejudicial in favor of Asian companies. Why do they all gain mention and yet those of us right her in the USA are ignored? Most of us are award winning artists with international acclaim, excellent practices, clear expertise and not one of us has been sourced. Why? What about Bergemann Dolls, Tracy Porter Dolls, Extreme Dolls, JPop Dolls, Berdine Creedy Dolls, Tonner Doll Company? The list goes on and yet I've seen this article more than once for years I think and still we go unmentioned. All because the major forum online which is the backer of the book you sourced is prejudiced against US artists. There are also well known notable artists in France and Australia among other countries. But only those in Asia seem to matter. Truly sad and downright wrong! - Bo Bergemann User:Bo Bergemann 2:00, 14 November 2014
 * To include a specific brand on Wikipedia, you need reliable sources that are independent of the brand, to demonstrate WP:WEIGHT/WP:NOTABILITY. And to be included in this article, the brand needs to be described in independent sources as being a ball-jointed doll specifically. (Though, since you appear to have a conflict of interest you are discouraged from editing this article directly.) You mentioned Tonner, but they already have a dedicated article at Tonner Doll Company, Inc., the creator even has his own article at Robert Tonner, and they are mentioned in the Fashion doll article, since they are usually discussed as fashion dolls by reliable sources, not ball-joined dolls. Note that this article does mention Goodreau Doll (US) and Sybarite (British) because they have been described as ball-jointed dolls by independent reliable sources. Siawase (talk) 19:54, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 one external links on Ball-jointed doll. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://blogs.laweekly.com/informer/2008/10/elfdoll_dont_call_them_a_toy_c.php
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081216001426/http://www.customhouse.co.kr:80/en/about/index.asp to http://www.customhouse.co.kr/en/about/index.asp
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://denofangels.com/sdfaq-otherbjdollsq.html#q23
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.japantoday.com/category/lifestyle/view/plastic-fantastic-japans-doll-industry-booming
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.japantoday.com/category/lifestyle/view/plastic-fantastic-japans-doll-industry-booming
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.japantoday.com/category/lifestyle/view/plastic-fantastic-japans-doll-industry-booming
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081216001426/http://www.customhouse.co.kr:80/en/about/index.asp to http://www.customhouse.co.kr/en/about/index.asp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 17:16, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

kyutai kansetsu ningyo
I was searching for "kyutai kansetsu ningyo" but no wiki articles came out. then I re do the search under ball jointed doll. Kyutai Kansetsu Ningyo is the Japan version of the doll.

I do not have much information of any depth on this. May I suggest authors to do some research. or at least enable the search to link back to this page

thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.92.125.119 (talk) 00:55, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Dollfie
2600:6C55:7600:14C8:3CD4:B680:47F:874F (talk) 07:33, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dollfie
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Dollfie