Talk:Vidal Sassoon

Madame Sassoon was not single

On a point of legal order, here. Vidal Sassoon's mother is wrongly discribed in the article as a single mother. She was no such thing.

A "single" person is someone who has never been married. Madame Sassoon was, in generic terms, an "unmarried" person. In specific terms, she was a "divorcée" - as opposed to a "widow", which is the other type of unmarried woman. An unmarried man is either a "divorcé" or a "widower" - only a man who has never been married is a "single" man.

The distinction is particularly important in property law and in family law (especially in community property jurisdictions). If a real estate contract or property deed incorrectly identifies a single person as "unmarried", a question potentially arises whether the property might become subject to a divorce proceeding (which could drastically slow down the financing process, while the bank tries to ascertain whether the person is divorced or widowed - only to discover he/she was actually single. Conversely, a deed or contract of sale for real property that identifies an unmarried person as a single person could result in a nuisance suit for fraud by the party's ex-spouse, if he/she was a divorcé/divorcée; among other problems.

So, it's important to use the correct terminology. Vidal Sassoon's mother was an "unmarried" mother, or she was a "divorcée"; but she was not a "single" mother since she was married to his father at the time he was born. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.198.146.98 (talk) 05:54, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

I rephrased a bit per your comments. She was described as a "single parent," not a "single mother." A link added to that term, which is a common description, clarifies it. That description also follows a paragraph stating he was born with two parents, and that his father left the family. Taken together, I can't imagine anyone being confused. In any case, the term "single parent" is much more common than "unmarried parent," in fact the ratio is 437 to 1, per Google. But if you feel it's necessary to state that his parents were married, which most would assume, I think, that could be added. --Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 07:03, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Fine, except that now it no longer says that his father left the family, so the reference to his mother "now being a single parent" makes no sense, as "now" suggests that something occurred to make her a single parent, but it is no longer stated what occurred. - Elmarco 08:07, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

I see someone has restored the statement about his father leaving the family, so it makes sense again. - Elmarco 08:14, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

She might well be single.

On a point of linguistic order...

A legal definition (of anything) is a particularly narrow, specialised type of definition by its very nature. Law does not define language, it employs it in its own particular ways for its own particular purposes. In the current context, the word 'single' quite validly means 'not married'. Whether that be because a person has never married or was once married and is no longer, it is still quite appropriate and accurate to describe them as being 'single'. Furthermore, a person might quite reasonably wish to convey their marital status without giving their marital history. This is similar to the current usage of 'Ms.' to avoid a female person stating whether they are married or not. In both cases, 'Ms.' and 'single', the description is considered more than adequate by the person choosing to use it without prompting their audience to draw irrelevant and unwarranted conclusions about the reasons for their status.

Thus, we should avoid using legal versions of language when the context does not require it, as is the case here. (Or, we should be consistent and scour Wikipedia for references to 'Ms' so that we can replace them by Mrs. or Miss, imposing our unwarranted nosiness on other people).

The law, as Dickens famously said, is often 'a ass'. Certainly to assume a monopoly on language (which the law famously uses very poorly, very often) is a prime example of the actions of 'a ass'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.161.61.97 (talk) 11:58, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

The Sassoons

Is Vidal Sassoon any relation to Siegfried Sassoon? SigPig 18:53, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

No he is not. Vidal was a Greek/Ukrainian Jew, and not a descendant of the Sassoon family that Siegfried was part of.

You say he was, but I'd say he still is, since he's still alive. 140.147.236.195 (talk) 14:11, 27 February 2009 (UTC)Stephen Kosciesza

Are you sure? The article on David Sassoon says: "All the Sassoons of Europe are said to be descendants of David Sassoon", and Seigfried was certainly of the same family as David.Cravenmonket 00:04, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't know about Mr. Sassoon's father's lineage in particular, but I do know that the Sassoon family, descended from David Sassoon, did spread throughout the Mediterranean and Near East, and not all of his sons went with him to Britain, so it is conceivable that a branch settled in Greece. Felgerkarb 13:47, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Vidal is of Iraqi descent, because the Sassons are Baghdadi Jews that originate from Iraq, thats to the retard that keeps on editing it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.66.10.125 (talk) 15:55, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Please watch your language or you'll be blocked. Firstly, Iraq is a modern creation, so he cannot be said to be of Iraqi origin. Secondly, until you find a reliable source that links his father to Baghdad that cannot be added. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel (talk) 17:38, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Certainly, a reliable source is a must. But, that having been said, what is wrong with using the word "Iraqi." Iraq may be a modern creation, but, in current times, when we describe one's historic nationality, it is common to refer to the modern name of the region, not a former name. Europe is Europe, not Laurasia. Zimbabwe is Zimbabwe, not Rhodesia. If not Iraqi, then what would you call someone from that region? Remember, Turkmen, Arab and Kurd refer to ethnic groups, not geographic areas. Cheers, ask123 (talk) 21:51, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

I study at the University of Ghent and in my English literature textbook, there is stated that Vidal belongs to the same family as Siegfried. I hope this can be a reliable source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.241.77.36 (talk) 12:10, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Influential hairdressers

"one of the most influential hairdressers of the mid-1960s" - in what sense are hairdressers influential? Adam

They're influential in setting fashion trends, which reflect the times people are living in. Roaming27 05:47, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Look at any cultural magazine from the sixties and seventies and you'll see Sassoon's influence all over the images. He created some of the most popular and iconic hairstyles of the late twentieth -- rather, the whole twentieth -- century. That makes him, a hairdresser, influential. ask123 (talk) 21:33, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Author details

I added "He has authored several books, including A Year of Beauty and Health co-written with his former wife, Beverly Sassoon." because I read the book way back in about 1977. Roaming27 07:06, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Nationality

Was Sassoon actually Israeli? I thought he was a British citizen born in England and therefore British. He traveled to Israel as a young man, but that doesn't make him Israeli. ask123 (talk) 07:10, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Also, if he was given Israeli citizenship upon his arrival to Israel, then doesn't that make him a citizen of Britain and Israel? ask123 (talk) 21:30, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Let's get a picture of the hairstyle?

I think it would make sense to include a picture of the hairstyle he's famous for reviving...should we borrow a free image from an article on one of the people who wore this cut? Nancy Kwan? Jean Muir? Juliette Gréco? Mireille Mathieu? I'm concerned about potential OR since I myself don't know what the specific cut he did looked like. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 22:09, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Odd category

The category "Procter & Gamble brands" seems a bit odd to me to apply to a person. If there were an article on "Vidal Sassoon (brand)" or something similar, that would be more appropriate. HandsomeFella (talk) 07:37, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Ditto, i was going to remove it but wasnt sure if his brand name redirects here or is seperate. If tis a ridirect i was afraid some poeple may reinsert i so dint want to twarLihaas (talk) 11:24, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Slogans

Weve go the "if youre not happy, were not happy" (which suddenly sounded familiar to me ;)) but what about the "bouncy hair, is sassoon quality hair". Was popular some 15 odd years agoLihaas (talk) 11:37, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Category:Sephardi Jews

This source does not establish to my satisfaction that he self-identified in this way. Per WP:BLP I have removed it. Any opinions? --John (talk) 01:24, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

JPost: "Born in London in 1928 to a Sephardi father from Turkey and an Ashkenazi mother from Kiev," although other souces identify both parents as Sephardim. Pedant's query: does WP:BLP still apply? He's passed away. 220.255.1.78 (talk) 06:54, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

I don't see self-identification there, I see confusion between the two sources. Yes, BLP still applies to the recently dead. --John (talk) 08:56, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

BLP does not apply to dead people, regardless of how long ago they died. The only dispute is whether his mother was Ukrainian or Spanish. Both parents were Jewish, hence Sassoon was Jewish. Jim Michael (talk) 13:14, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Wrong, twice. --John (talk) 13:19, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Not sure what the problem is. JPost states: "Sassoon, a self-described proud Jew." At least three sources indicate that one or both parents are Sephardic Jews. I think I'm with Jim on this. 220.255.1.55 (talk) 15:03, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Also see the Jewish Chronicle: "Born in Britain to Sephardi Jewish parents from Greece and Spain." So it's either both parents Sephardi (three sources) or Sephardi father (one source). Moreover, it was mom who sent him to a Sephardic Jewish orphanage. Confusion seems to stem from the dual status of Jewishness as an ethnicity and a religion, but whether he was self-professedly religious or not may be immaterial, given that Jewish ethnic divisions lists Sephardim as an ethnicity, and WP:BLP doesn't seem to require self-identification for ethnicity. 220.255.1.45 (talk) 15:30, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

I'm not wrong on this. Despite many people claiming that BLP applies to the recently dead, no policy or guideline states that to be the case. Self-identification is not necessary in the case of dead people, but we have self-identification anyway. Most sources say both parents were Sephardi, which is an ethnicity. There is nothing contradicting this, except one source that says his mother was a Ukrainian / Ashkenazi. Jim Michael (talk) 16:00, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

WP:BDP, WP:BLPCAT would seem to apply in this case. If we have a decent source where he describes himself as a Sephardi Jew, we could use that; it would certainly need to appear in the body of the article with a decent source before it could appear as a category. --John (talk) 20:03, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

BDP cautions against info that has implications for living relatives and that which is contentious; stating that Sassoon was Sephardi is neither. It does not state that self-identification is required. No part of BLP is relevant, because Sassoon and his parents are dead. Sephardim are an ethnic group; a person with Sephardi parents is Sephardi. Jim Michael (talk) 21:54, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

There is no such thing as Ethnically Jewish. Judaism is a religion. There are Jews very many ethnic groups, including China, Ethiopia, India, Iran, just to name a few. The Sephardim are not an ethnic group, they are descended from Sepharad, the Hebrew name for the Iberian peninsula. The Spanish people are, like almost every nation a mixture of ethnic groups that passed and or stayed over the centuries. The Jews of Spain and Portugal mainly arrived with the Muslim conquest from North Africa, but not all. In addition, Jews from North Africa today call themselves Sephardim, but so do many from Holland, since a lot of Jews expelled from Iberia were welcomed into what is now The Netherlands Historygypsy (talk) 00:29, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Sassoon writes in Sorry I Kept You Waiting, Madam, "when I was five, she reluctantly sent me to the Orphanage for Sephardic Jews in Maida Vale," and states in this interview that "I am Sephardic from my father’s side," and that he would "guess" his mother is Ashkenazi. So his Sephardi ethnicity is attested to on one side at a minimum. In any case, WP:BLPCAT applies to "religious beliefs or sexual orientation" of living people and doesn't mention or require self-identification for ethnicity. Sassoon is ethnic Sephardi according to multiple sources. That should suffice. 220.255.1.87 (talk) 22:08, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

I don't agree. Per WP:BLPCAT, we need not only reliable sources but also evidence that the category is "relevant to their public life or notability, according to reliable published sources". I am pretty sure that the Jewish Journal wouldn't suffice. Any others? --John (talk) 22:36, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure you're wrong. The The_Jewish_Journal_of_Greater_Los_Angeles Jewish Journal clearly qualifies as a reliable published source. Sassoon's autobiography also states that he went to an orphanage for Sephardic Jews. At least four other sources state that he is of Sephardic Jewish descent (in addition to his self-identifying statements). The evidence, taken in totality, is overwhelming. Not sure why you're so resistant. You reject one source, I provided several more. You asked for one self-identifying statement, I provided two. You shift the goal posts, I anticipated it: as noted by one of the sources, he is a "self-described proud Jew," who was active in Jewish philanthropy and Jewish causes, so his Jewishness is plainly relevant to his public life and notability. All the sources agree that he is, at a minimum, "Sephardic from [his] father’s side." Not one suggests otherwise. 220.255.1.54 (talk) 23:44, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

It appears that I need to reiterate that BLP rules only apply to living people; Sassoon is dead. Jim Michael (talk) 23:32, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Contentious or questionable material that affects living persons or recently deceased persons should be removed promptly. If there's a consensus here that there are multiple, reliable sources that establish the relevance of Sasson's ethnicity to his notability (I still have my doubts) then we can mention it in the article and add the category. What's the hurry to add this, when it seems to be contentious and (so far) the only sources don't seem that good? --John (talk) 00:10, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

There is nothing contentious about his ethnicity. All the sources agree that he is Sephardic from his father's side, including the man himself: "I am Sephardic from my father’s side." The sources are impeccable: national broadsheets, major high-circulation Jewish newspapers, his autobiography. 220.255.1.86 (talk) 00:33, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

We are not claiming that Sassoon was a follower of Judaism. He was ethnically Jewish because his parents were Jewish. This is backed by reliable sources. BLPCAT does not mention ethnicity, so even when he was alive we did not need him to have self-identified, nor for it to have been relevant to his notability. Jim Michael (talk) 00:43, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Sources that reliably state that his family came from either Ukraine or Spain, a mere several thousand miles away? Sorry, I am still not seeing it. "He was ethnically Jewish because his parents were Jewish" is not and cannot be how we work here. --John (talk) 08:10, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

The standard for Wikipedia isn't you "not seeing it." It's verifiability -- and it is verifiable that he is ethnically Jewish. His autobiography states that he went to an "Orphanage for Sephardic Jews" and that "about a dozen of us Jewish kids marched every day from the orphanage in Maida Vale to school." He is a "self-described proud Jew" (Jerusalem Post), is in his own words "Sephardic from my father's side" (Jewish Journal), was born to Sephardic Jewish parents (Telegraph, Jewish Chronicle, Wall Street Journal), and is described biographically as a "working-class Jewish boy" by the New York Times. It really doesn't get any more reliably sourced than this. Your intransigent "not seeing this" is not how we work here. Saying that he was not ethnically Jewish even though his parents were Jewish is like saying someone is not ethnically Chinese even though his parents were Chinese (and even though his autobiography, interviews, and news publications describe him as such). There is no basis -- none -- for your removal of well-sourced biographical material about Sassoon. Your intransigence isn't a basis. That's not how we work here. 220.255.1.60 (talk) 13:17, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

John, don't push your luck. This idea that we're going to "debate" about whether people who are fully Jewish and have been described as Jewish by reliable sources and have described themselves as Jewish should be categorized as "Jewish" - well, we're not gonna do that. Find another way to occupy your time. All Hallow's Wraith (talk) 04:56, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Sorry John but you calearly and unanimously againt conensus here. The onus is then on you t o prove the validity of the arguement and convince not on ohters to suit "my satisfaction".Lihaas (talk) 09:52, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Illness and death

Without wishing to trivialize the loss of Vidal Sassoon to his family, but I could not understand the recent comment added to the article: "His death was originally reported to be a result of natural causes,and later reported to have been a result of his leukemia." Is Leukaemia not a natural cause?--SouthernFrog (talk) 11:48, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Leukemia is a natural cause. Jim Michael (talk) 13:14, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Somewhat but natural caue implies something that was unexpected like passing away during sleep. Cancer is expected to be fatal in most caes, its just a matter of time. (Again no intention of trivialising it)Lihaas (talk) 09:53, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Are we a tabloid?

I've repeatedly removed this purple prose from the article:

His father, a womaniser, left his family when Vidal was three years old.

It fails, I would argue, WP:BLP and it is well-established that the Daily Mail is not a good source for material like this. Any other opinions? --John (talk) 15:17, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

I tend to agree that the Daily Mail isn't a reliable source. - Burpelson AFB ✈ 15:57, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

The Telegraph and The Age both describe his father Jack -- not Nathan -- as "a womaniser." Sassoon writes in Vidal: The Autobiography that his father had a "playboy manner" who had "a love for life -- and women." So the Daily Mail is substantially accurate here in its adaptation of the book (as they would be, given that they would have needed permission from Sassoon and his publishers to publish abstracts). Unless there is a blanket policy on established tabloids being verboten (I'm not aware of any), I think singling out one tabloid and not others is dangerous practice. The Sun/Mirror/Star/Metro/Express/Record/Bild/Paris Match/Verdens Gang are all established tabloids that probably ought to be excluded on the same grounds if such a policy is adopted. Otherwise what we have is piecemeal exclusion of some sources but not others based on inconsistent subjective perception (the Daily Mail is reviled by left-wing types, the Daily Mirror is less credible to right-wing types).

More worrying is the confusion over Jack/Nathan from ostensibly reliable sources such as the New Yorker. According to the Los Angeles Times Jack was Sassoon's birth father, Nathan (Goldberg) was his stepfather. The LA Times is corroborated by Sassoon's autobiography, which states that his father "Jack Sassoon, was born in Salonika" and that his mother had "become Mrs Nathan Goldberg" through remarriage, making Nathan his stepfather. 220.255.1.55 (talk) 18:03, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Also Johm, you are again throughly against consensus in insinuating this is a BLP issue, everyone disagrees . WP:DEADHORSE

Also see RSN for the daily mail issue(which is where it ought to go)Lihaas (talk) 18:48, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

In cases of uncertainty we can either report the uncertainty or just omit the whole area. Lihaas, you seriously need to read WP:BDP if you really think that. --John (talk) 21:35, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

There is no uncertainty over the womaniser quote. All the sources agree, including the one you cast aspersions upon. The Nathan/Jack confusion which I raised was a different issue, one that illustrates that even nominally 'reliable' non-tabloid sources don't always get things right. 220.255.1.37 (talk) 22:23, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

The two sources you give are actually the same one twice! I don't think "womaniser" is a quote, it isn't punctuated or attributed as such. I also don't think we can use language like this. As an encyclopaedia we generally aim for a better tone than this. If it was a sourced quote you might have more of a point. --John (talk) 22:30, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Then your problem is with tone, not with whether the statement is reliably sourced (which it is). That two newspapers published the same obituary means it's undergone at least two rounds of editorial sifting. If it's reliable enough for The Telegraph and The Age, it's reliable enough for Wikipedia. As for "quote" -- I mean language quoted from reliable sources (as in quoting the newspaper). All three third-party reliable sources used "womaniser" to describe what Sassoon himself has stated in his autobiography (that his father had a "playboy manner" and "a love for . . . women."). Would you prefer to use "playboy"? :-) I'm willing to be persuaded that language lifted from reliably-sourced orbituaries transgresses some tone guidelines, but you haven't made an argument for it. 220.255.1.92 (talk) 23:34, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

The consensus discussions over here and above clarly indicate that your assertons against the grain of consensus. ikewise the sources here also trump your sugestions of uncertainty and RS. As the IP said, change is welcome but theres no reason to remove everything. Use a different wording then.

And let me reiterate the noteworthyiness of the daily mail should be discussd on RSN (as i did)Lihaas (talk) 03:02, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Yes, and the consensus there (so far) is that we cannot use the Mail for material of this type, as I said a while ago. --John (talk) 21:07, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

WP:CCC and that leads to Wikipedia:RSN#Daily_Mail AND consensus is not vote counting AND the discussion on this page that has straight out refuted all your comments. There isnt a single element of support for you despite your multile reverts vs. discussion

Nor is there a reason. Othe than your now non-AGF assertions of BLP unanimously against consensus (you may argue but no one else does and this is not your weblog) and claims of a tabloid source

Further the MULTIPLE sources above say the same thing, so your attempts at censorship per IDONTLIKEIT are not AGFLihaas (talk) 20:40, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for reminding me that this is not my weblog, Lihaas. My proposal, given the discussion here and at the noticeboard, would be that we craft a neutrally-worded mention of Sassoon's father (and this would definitely not use tabloidy language like "womaniser", "playboy" or "libertine" etc.) and source it from the non-Daily Mail sources that have been uncovered. What do you say? --John (talk) 18:27, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

References

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Vidal Sassoon. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110615164502/http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/beauty/article6882818.ece to http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/beauty/article6882818.ece

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 09:31, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Vidal Sassoon. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120208154847/http://www.ushmm.org/museum/exhibit/focus/antisemitism/voices/transcript/?content=20120105 to http://www.ushmm.org/museum/exhibit/focus/antisemitism/voices/transcript/?content=20120105
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20060117082253/http://english.sem40.ru:80/jewish_fortune/8333/ to http://english.sem40.ru/jewish_fortune/8333/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:16, 21 July 2016 (UTC)