SoniaLall24

Daniel Galvin

Hello Sonia, re your enquiry on my talk page [1], I'll respond here so that you have it for future reference. Daniel Galvin is "live" because I wrote an article on him. It is not your draft, which was completely unsuitable and blatantly promotional. It is a completely different piece which I wrote based on the references I've listed in the article. You asked, "How this can be edited so info is correct?" If you consider any of the information incorrect, then point this out at Talk:Daniel Galvin. Editors who do not have a conflict of interest will evaluate it and make changes if they are valid and supported by reliable published sources. Editors with a strong conflict of interest and especially those who are paid by the subject, and that includes working for the PR agency of which the subject is a client, are strongly discouraged from editing an article directly. Note that any attempts to insert promotional, unencyclopedic material will be reverted, and that any self-serving claims which do not have a published reliable source, independent of the subject will likewise be reverted. I strongly suggest that you read very carefully the guidelines and policy outlined at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest before you proceed. Voceditenore (talk) 15:23, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you very much. So if I talk and write back with information including clear and correct references in a non-promotional way and non-PR manner this will be considered by editors? Thanks. SoniaLall24 (talk) 18:00, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Yes, it will. However, please thoroughly familarise yourself first with the policies at Wikipedia:Verifiability and the pages linked from the Verifiability page, especially Wikipedia:No original research. Other pricinciples to bear in mind are

• Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Simply because a fact can be verified does not necessarily mean it should be in an article.
• This is an encyclopedia. Its purpose is to provide neutrally written, concise, key information about the subject. Its purpose is not to enhance the subject's image or further their business interests. Nor is an article an alternative web site for the subject. Much of the material which is appropriate for a subject's website is completely inappropriate for an encyclopedia

Voceditenore (talk) 08:13, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Am I correct in thinking that newspapers are a legitimate source? Many thanks. SoniaLall24 (talk) 10:16, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

@SoniaLall24: Most newspapers, absolutely. Some "tabloids" are frowned upon, but please post any additional sources you have to Talk:Daniel Galvin and we can figure out how to incorporate them. I've suggested the article as a possible "Did you know ...?" to be featured on the lower left of the Wikipedia home page, so if there are errors of fact we'd very much like you to point them out soon. As far as I can tell, everything that is currently posted is supported by reliable sourcing to newspapers and other secondary sources. (But we don't want Wikipedia to propagate possible misinformation even if it has already been reported elsewhere. For example, did Daniel Galvin's clientele include Camilla Parker-Bowles, as asserted by the Daily Mail? Sometimes the Daily Mail isn't reliable, and the article there has no byline and is mainly focused on Daniel Jr. Papers do get things wrong.) In any event, we're here to help! I'm watching this page but you can also reply to me on my own Talk Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 03:14, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you ever so much! I am collating and finding credible articles currently and I will post them soon. Very best wishes SoniaLall24 (talk) 13:38, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Daniel Galvin references

http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/style/article231819.ece - can Nicole Kidman be mentioned also

http://businesslife.ba.com/People/Interviews/Daniel-Galvin.html - ‘This award was given to me for my work on the film A Clockwork Orange… At the time I was the only person doing these crazy colours. The film was withdrawn in the UK and I was given the award when it was finally re-released, about 30 years after it was made.’

Awards

2011 Lifetime Achievement Award - http://www.fellowshiphair.com/downloads/honour_and_awards_2012.pdf

Patron of Honour - http://www.hji.co.uk/hair/daniel-galvin-named-as-hairdressing-council-patron-of-honour/

Can the below be added or do they need sources?

OBE awarded for contribution to hair colour and the industry 2006

Intercoiffure Congress 1978 1978

World Creative Artist Award 1991

C.A.C.F Italia 1992 Creative Group Award 1991

World Creative Artist Award- Hair Colour USA 1993

World Hair Colourist of The Year- Hair Colour USA 1995

World Creative Artist Award 1994

World Creative Artist Award 1997

Fellowship of British Hairdressing 2000

Lifetime Achievement Award – Fellowship of British Hairdressers 2011

Hair and Beauty Benevolent Award 2014

Hairdressing Council, Patron of Honour Award November 2013

Hairdressing Council, Patron of Honour Award November 2014 SoniaLall24 (talk) 14:55, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

• Sonia, as Vesuvius Dogg said, please post these suggestions for additions and extra sources to Talk:Daniel Galvin. That is the appropriate place for discussion on article improvement, not individual users' talk pages. Voceditenore (talk) 15:24, 29 October 2015 (UTC)