Talk:Rodolfo Valentin

message: I am removing this from the Good Articles candidates list because it is tagged as unsourced and possibly unnotable, and because it appears to be the subject of some debate. Once it is reformatted, sourced, expanded, and agreed-upon, it may be renominated. Chubbles 05:49, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Failed GA

message: telemundo verification link: http://www.telemundo47.com/noticias/12931703/detail.html
justice all the way 19:54, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Telemundo added

message: Generally, linking to an "official site" of the subject of an article is indeed appropriate. We certainly do so for Microsoft and Ebay, so I see no reason not to do so here, so long as it's verifiable that the site in question is indeed the subject's own. Seraphimblade Talk to me 21:22, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Found here: Wikipedia:Editor assistance/Requests. — Dorvaq (talk) 17:48, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: response from wikipedia editor assistant

message: What should be linked
Articles about any organization, person, web site, or other entity should link to the official site if any. 
An article about a book, a musical score, or some other media should link to a site hosting a copy of the work if none of the "Links normally to be avoided" criteria apply. 
Sites that contain neutral and accurate material that cannot be integrated into the Wikipedia article due to copyright issues, amount of detail (such as professional athlete statistics, movie or television credits, interview transcripts, or online textbooks) or other reasons. 
Sites with other meaningful, relevant content that is not suitable for inclusion in an article, such as reviews and interviews. 
Links to be considered —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Justice all the way (talk • contribs) 19:33, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes Justice, but that doesn't mean to link every review/interview you find on the web. — Dorvaq (talk) 19:38, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: According to WP

message: I am very confused about the constantly deletion of the link to Rodolfo Valentin official site which is:
Official site. Other hairdressers, are having their "official site" listed in the external links. The "history" in one of them shows a note that reads: " primary source for this article, as required by WP:V an official policy of wikipedia, please do not delete".. Rodolfo Valentin article ALSO needs the official site external link as a "primary source" for that article. Specially having that sign on top of the article stating that the article needs "sources"... (You think that in wikipedia are some kind of favoritism?).
I would like to hear If it is possible to restore the external link to the official site. Thank you!
justice all the way 18:25, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: External links

message: Hairstylist Rodolfo Valentin has also other good external links for sources of information.
Hair Prosthesis site, offers an "step by step' on how a hair prosthesis is made. It has been listed as a "source" in the Hair Prosthesis article, but has been deleted.
Also, regarding hairpieces, the site Hair Pieces site was listed in the Hairpiece article and also deleted.
For last, the "Hair Infusion" hair extensions technique, is having a external source for information which is:
Hair Infusion site, also deleted.
???justice all the way 18:34, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Also good sources

message: Rodolfo Valentin is also an actor. Last movie was done in 1999 as noted in The New York Times article- link:  
It should be included.
Ralicia 23:33, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: movie

message: Frederic Fekkai and Vidal Sassoon have their website listed in the article and Jonathan Antinis having his selling products website also showing in the external links. Is there any specific reason why Rodolfo Valentin cannot have listed the website in the "box"?- Rodolfo website is a very good source for verification of several things!. I would like to hear from editors if they opposing to list http://www.rodolfovalentin.com / RV site in the "box"?- Ralicia 14:40, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: See: Request for editor assistance regarding this same issue. — Dorvaq (talk) 16:23, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: website

message: Justice, it looks like you did a nice job on the sourcing.  Can you please leave the tag up until I verify your references?  I propose to remove it once I've done so. — Dorvaq (talk) 18:58, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources 

message: I have re-added the official website of Rodolfo Valentin as per external links guidelines and as a result of a similar discussion here: Talk:Frédéric Fekkai.
Point number one of WP:EL#What should be linked states, "Articles about any organization, person, web site, or other entity should link to the official site if any." (Emphasis added).  I don't believe there should be any contention as to whether or not the website is indeed the official website given its features and portrayal of Rodolfo Valentin.
Any remaining issues regarding the external link should be brought up for discussion on the WP:EL discussion page where they should be. — Dorvaq (talk) 16:00, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Official website 

message: I removed indications on this page that the article was nominated as a good article.  I don't see it listed at Wikipedia:Good article candidates and I don't see any indication that it was listed or passed.  Did I miss something?  
For what it's worth, the article is much, much better than it was a month ago.  I still think it reads like an ad and I wouldn't really call it a GA, but it's doing well.  Thanks to everyone for your work on this.  bikeable (talk) 18:13, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  'Good article'  

message: The article has been tagged by me as needing a review of the sourcing.  Much of the citations are to web sites which appear to be affiliated with Rodolfo Valentin in some way and as such constitute self-published sources.  Others are blogs and again are not deemed to be reliable.  The whole lot of them need a thorough going over. -- Whpq (talk) 20:41, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Sourcing

message: Dear uer Whpq: here are two sites for verification about that Moriarty and Claudia Cohen have their hair styled by Rodolfo Valentin.
The first one is:  and it reads: the Argentine-born Valentin has been catering to his US clients for 20 years and attributes his success to devotees like Claudia Cohen, Susan Hess, Ivana Trump and Antonia and Johanna Bennett, daughters of legendary crooner Tony. , for what you see the name of the Ivana trump can also be added.
Also here is another site for verification: , that reads: His hair creations are exhibited at top salons in Manhattan Frederic Fekkai and Stephen Knoll, where Madonna snagged Valentin designs. The hair he uses is top-quality, natural hair from around the world. He has done hair extensions for Sophia Loren, Marla Maples, Ivana Trump, Brooke Shields, Kathy Moriarty, Claudia Cohen and Susan Hess, young Orthodox women and the ladies of the Five Towns. 
and regarding the page six from the New York Post newspaper itself i found: 
, that reads: NOW hair this: publicist David Granoff will go to harrowing lengths to plug his clients. Granoff, the mouthpiece for plus-size pin-up Anna Nicole Smith, underwent a "mega-graft hair transplant" a few weeks back to hype hair specialist Dr. Bahman Ashraf. Granoff, who to our eyes already had a healthy head of hair, explained: "If the wind blows a certain way, you can tell I have a receding hairline. Now I have all these little hairs sprouting in front." Granoff hosted a party in Cedarhurst, L.I., for the opening of Rodolfo Valentin's "salon, spa and hairpieces" headquarters, where Claudia Cohen, Cathy Moriarity and Susan Hess quaffed champagne and Beluga caviar. and the last one to verify that Rodolfo does Moriarty hair is also from The New York Post/ page six:  and it reads: THAT Rodolfo Valentin - the Cedarhurst, L.I., wigmakerhair-weaver opening a salon on Madison Avenue in the fall - will do Cathy Moriarty's hair when she plays Mrs. John Gotti in a Warner Bros. feature. Robert De Niro plays the Dapper Don . . ---I think this also verify that Rodolfo Valentin was doing Moriarty hair linked t Warner Bros....
I hope all these information will be helpfull to improve this article, I also think these references should be added to the article. I am not doing myself because every time I add something with the proper references it is erased anyway. Thanks71.190.65.119 (talk) 22:39, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The major problem with earlier editions of the article were that they were written like a press release / fan writeup.  That's fine for somebody's personal web site but not for an encyclopedia article.  He is certainly known for having celebrity clientele, and that should be included in the article, but what is not acceptable is a laundry list of clients which was previously what was present.  And quite frankly, there appear to be a bunch of editors that have some association with Rodolfo Valentin that have been adding non-neutral point of view material to the article  whcih is why all the reversions have been happening. -- Whpq (talk) 11:42, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rodolfo Valentin correct links for verification 

message: You haven't any opposition because there was not reasonable amount of time. You have proposed the merging a few days ago. I don't agree of merging the two articles, just because they are two different matters.Susy parker (talk) 02:15, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  I don't agree with the merging of the two articles 

message: articles are not compatible, don't merge themjormarie 17:49, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  don't merge 

message: Substituted at 04:47, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: There is a claim in the article on having a "patented" system "The Hair Infusion" - however, the listing given was not for a patent, but for a trademark. (Valentin's partner has held two trademarks on the term "The Hair Infusion", one live trademark, one dead.) I am editing to reflect that. --Nat Gertler (talk) 15:34, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Patent claim 

message: I just yanked a section listing rewards, because they were either 
* reader ratings (which count as self-published; see the handling of Rotten Tomatoes at WP:PERENNIAL);
* given by a site that limited contestants to their advertisers (the now-defunct New York Hair site); or
* an award of dubious value (given by a product distributor) sourced to a self-published image of a letter.
Please do not reinsert such coverage. --Nat Gertler (talk) 16:01, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Awards