Talk:List of historical sources for pink and blue as gender signifiers

Recent edits
A user recently made a good-faith change (2 edits) to the lede that is problematic. First, I aappreciate the compliment in the comment ("Congratulations. You managed to reference an article completely debunking the theory, without even mentioning that it does so. I didn't need to do anything other than read the reference you already gave.") The problem with these edits will become clear if you look at the Table of Contents, Section 3 "Pink for boys, blue for girls." This link provides a fuller explanation of what happened (a recent answer I gave on Quora). The problem with Marco Del Giudice is that he only checked Google Books indirectly, through two corpora containing only samples. Also, there are issues with the searchability of this material. Sometimes entire phrases are not properly indexed. Zyxwv99 (talk) 19:26, 28 April 2017 (UTC)


 * "The problem with" the source that you have supposedly found is original research and Wikipedia is not supposed to be edited on that basis. You're not permitted to use the source to reach a conclusion contrary to what it itself says.  Ken Arromdee (talk) 15:01, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Why a list?
Why is this article a list of sources, rather than prose that summarises and cites those sources? --Lord Belbury (talk) 16:49, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Looks like this has been noted elsewhere since, and an article created at Gendered associations of pink and blue. --Lord Belbury (talk) 09:47, 3 June 2021 (UTC)


 * I have nominated this page to be moved to some other Wikimedia project, because it is not an encyclopedia article. jnestorius(talk) 13:06, 23 August 2022 (UTC)