in the trailer shown in this thread:
It says barbie was the first doll for kids that was an teenager/adult is that true ?
This could go here or the game room, it is a coin toss. I removed that part of the title for you.
As to Barbie being the first doll for kids that was an teenager/adult it appears to be true with some additional conditions.
There were already paper dolls for girls to play with that let them dress them up as different professions. But Barbie seems to be the first 3D doll for kids. They’re might be some minor, non-mass market exceptions.
2 fun trivia bits about Barbie:
A Barbie is purchased every 3 seconds on average.
The first one sold in 1959.
That’s what I’ve always heard, but I had a little ballerina doll when I was four (before Barbie came out).
I used to enjoy tying her up with my mother’s nylons. 
Yeah, the creator explicitly set out to make a toy doll for girls that could give them a way to play fantasy as a grown woman as opposed to playing fantasy mommy to a baby. She saw that the boys had the hero action figure GI Joe and wanted to do the same thing for girls. That’s why Barbie has so many jobs!
If you have Netflix I highly recommend checking out the series “The Toys that Made Us” which does an excellent deep dive on all their subjects, including Barbie in the Barbie episode.
If you don’t have Netflix but you have access to the History Channel On Demand through your cable subscription, there is a series there called “The Toys That Built America” that also has a Barbie episode. It’s not as fun as the “Toys That Made Us” series, though.
ETA: Here’s an overview of the “Toys That Made Us” Barbie episode that gives a rundown of the creation.
In what sense were the GI Joe figures not “adult dolls for kids”?
They weren’t dolls but action figures. Completely different thing.
I see GI Joe listed as starting in 1964. I think ZipperJJ got something confused maybe.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G.I._Joe#Stan_Weston’s_original_design_(1963)
You’re right. In the show they do come around to comparing Barbie to GI Joe. I think it was that comparison that gave Barbie all of those jobs, where before she was just a fashion doll. She was NOT created in reaction to GI Joe, but indeed out of inspiration from wanting more than just paper dolls as you said.
Thank you for not jumping down my throat about it 
In fact, it seems to have been the other way around!
However, little boys had had 3D soldier “dolls” for many decades before GI Joe, and Levine explicitly referenced that in a quote in the above-linked article:
As you note, Barbie was directly inspired by fashion dolls, particularly the recently developed 1950s German Bild Lilli. But fashion dolls, like toy soldiers, have a much longer history.
Oh, and back to this OP question:
No, Barbie was not the first children’s doll representing an adult, as opposed to traditional “baby dolls” and “rag babies” etc.
3-D “fashion dolls”, meant to represent young adult women, were popular from at least the mid-19th century. Originating as reduced-scale dressmaker’s models and fashion advertisements in previous centuries, they evolved by 1860 into playthings for little girls to dress in different outfits (and sewing said outfits developed their needlework skills).
As a matter of fact, the juvenile version of the fashion doll, representing a fancily-dressed little girl, seems to have been a late 19th-century innovation by the French dollmaking firm Jumeau, under the name “Jumeau Bébé”.
The juvenile fashion doll AFAICT dominated the high-end doll market up to the mid-20th century, combining the appeal of elaborate interchangeable fashion outfits with the relatability of little-girl dolls for little girls. The doll that first reintroduced a grown-up persona (and figure) to any significant extent, again AFAICT, was not Barbie in 1959 but Madame Alexander’s “Cissy” in 1955.
Barbie: 1959.
G.I. Joe: 1964.
That story might have confused the two dolls, with Hasbro trying to copy Barbie or it could be any number of possible mistakes or misunderstandings, but Barbie would not have been the same as “G.I. Joe for girls.”
OK, so Barbie definitely wasn’t the first “fashion doll”. But it might have (later) been the first female “career doll”, to the extent that such a category exists.
Makes sense, if you don’t count things like pre-1959 Madame Alexander “ballerina” and “nurse” dolls, which technically could be said to represent women with careers. But (i) AFAICT the dolls were juvenile-style even if they were wearing “grown-up” outfits, and (ii) individual dolls were definitely not marketed as having a lot of different career options, the way Barbie ended up being.
Fashion dolls, true to their historical roots, were basically about fancy outfits for fancy outfits’ sake, and most professional garb for women at the time would not have been considered “fancy”. Not until women having careers began to be regarded as both normal and socially desirable did it become at all glamorous to put a doll into various kinds of workwear. (Barbie has never been a maid, for example, except in some Japanese-exclusive specialty designs AFAIK.)
Damn Straight! I DO NOT have a closet full of toys. I invest in ‘Collectables’. Completely different thing.