Talk:Tressy

Distribution
Hello, sorry I'm french and my english is not good. "Unlike Mattel, which maintained sole manufacturing and global distribution rights on its bestselling Barbie doll" is wrong. In France, Barbie was first distributed by a company called "Jouets Rationnels", from 1963 to 1969. Mattel France has only existed since 1969.

References : Eric Chatillon, Barbie en France : Les années Jouets Rationnels, Dollexpo, 2005, 144 pages + https://www.societe.com/societe/mattel-france-692039688.html.

And in Sweden, Barbie was distributed by Brio (company) (only first years) (https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/483292603745819099/ and http://www.nrfbfashiondolls.com/store/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=40&products_id=3337&osCsid=q5b5tbfplro7avfn2pmppa0nr1 --Guil2027 (talk) 18:19, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

November 2010
I undid the merging of this article. I've been researching the Ideal doll articles for a while now, and many of these articles should probably be merged (most of the doll articles at Category:Ideal toys are likely best off merged to Crissy Doll, which appears to be the main character similar to Barbie.) But Tressy is actually not one of them. It's an independent line predating Ideal and a notable topic in itself. I just added one reference just a few days ago intending to clean this up. Looking at google books and google news there are plenty more sources to draw from. Siawase (talk) 11:40, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Just ETA that I performed the merger of all the Crissy related dolls, and also merged Ideal Cricket Doll here. Siawase (talk) 12:29, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Siawese, I would have appreciated a note on my talk page. But really, you're not seriously claiming that this is a 'reference' in accordance with WP:RS, are you? And just so you know where I was coming from and what I found: this is the hit for "Ideal Tressy Doll." Thanks, Drmies (talk) 19:12, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Apologies, I guess I assumed you watchlisted this article, sorry about that. And actually yes, as far as I can tell, that is a reliable source for the type of material I intended to use it for, at least per previous consensus at Reliable sources/Noticeboard, in particular this archived post, and also these: Though I certainly wasn't planning on building the article on that one source, it was just a starting point. And yeah, it took me quite a bit of research to realize that the previous name of this article was a bit misleading. The earlier version of the doll seems much more notable. Siawase (talk) 19:34, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your note. I had seen that discussion on About.com before, and I am much more with Sandy than with DGG on that one, and think that articles there should be judged individually. The article at least has a name underneath it--though I have my doubts about the title "Doll Collecting Guide." And there's only one, brief mention of the Tressy doll there. Well, what can I say but good luck rewriting the article? Good luck! Drmies (talk) 19:48, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
 * lol thanks - I'll need it. Siawase (talk) 20:06, 5 November 2010 (UTC)