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)Reply
- "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)Reply