Talk:Daniel David

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Daniel David article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or if there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
	This article is supported by the Science and academia work group.

It is requested that a picture or pictures of this person be included in this article to improve its quality. Note: Wikipedia's non-free content use policy almost never permits the use of non-free images (such as promotional photos, press photos, screenshots, book covers and similar) to merely show what a living person looks like. Efforts should be made to take a free licensed photo during a public appearance, or obtaining a free content release of an existing photo instead.

An appropriate infobox may need to be added to this article, or the current infobox may need to be updated. Please refer to the list of biography infoboxes for further information.

I was one of poeple who participated in the elaboration of this article. I guess that all the information offered are verified and verifiable. I will explore egain the artcile to check that all info. is verified and balanced.

Alin —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.196.151.33 (talk • contribs)

You consider this paragraph I deleted NPOV?

Considered by his peers a beautiful mind and a brilliant person, his research work was prized by major figures in the field. Thus, Dr. Albert Ellis said that "...his research work is a gem and it speaks about a young genius..." and Dr. Aaron T. Beck said that "...I do consider him one of the most knowledgeable people in regard to the basic cognitive science underlying cognitive therapy..."

And generally your article conflicts with the following Wikipedia policies: Wikipedia:No original research, Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. Let's discuss all the issues here (please do not delete the NPOV and cleanup tags until the discussion is over). Mentatus 07:52, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I think you are correct. I was not the author of that text (maybe many people contributed); however, I after reading them, I have checked and found some of those references on the website (eg. at www.psychotherapy.ro); so, although they seem correct I agree it is too positive (for a living person!). It is good you took them out. However, the other comments seem correct and verifiable in my view.

Alin —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.196.151.33 (talk • contribs)

I am sorry; I have posted that part of the text based on the reccomendations I found on the internet (serious ones see at www.psychotherapy.ro) and based on those presentations I attended myself when Dr. David was awarded various awards by his peers. However, I was not aware about the neutrality issue and indeed, the text is biased towards positive. So, I agree to delete that part of the text. (Mircea, Turda). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.79.125.134 (talk • contribs)

Well, the article seems balanced to me in this form. (Cosmin) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.231.19.85 (talk • contribs)

Interesting article and discussions. I did not know about the "Wikipedia" and but it is fun and useful (I guess). I know Daniel from various conferences (I am an assistant professor myself). He is like a magnet to people that is why he is so positively regarded. Just for curiosity, I have check the info. in professional sources and most of it is correct. Because he is not a magent to me (I think!) I have tempered to tone of the text and I have deleted all info. based on paraprofessional rather than professional sources. Based on this, I think it is correct to take out the tag (I will do it). If you do not agree with my actions (e.g., taking out some info., tempering the tone, taking out the tag) please let me know the reason and let us discuss (Dr. Ardelean Florin). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.123.87.200 (talk • contribs)

I guess some citations are still needed for the following statements:

"[..]by this Governmental position strongly influencing the reform of the postdoctoral programs in the Romanian educational system."

"Considering his background he represents a unique professional profile[..]"

"[..]he is the most cited Romanian psychologist in the international literature" (I could not find this statement confirmed on the Ad Astra website)

"[..]marked the reform of the clinical field in Romania, helping in moving the field from a '70s style approach to the modern one."

Please provide some sources (have a look also at the Wikipedia:Verifiability policy). Mentatus 14:33, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Let me tell where I found some of the info. Ad-Astra (http://www.ad-astra.ro/cartea-alba/authors.php?order=n_articles&domain_id=150) The other sources can be found in his presentation in various books of him made by the publishers (http://www.polirom.ro/cauta.cgi?action=cauta&class=search&autor=David) I guess that those who wrote the articles could post the references in the article. Dr. Ardelean.

To Dr. Ardelean: why did you take out the text related to the Thomsom ISI? To the moderator: as one of the authors I have put the references. (Alin)