Talk:Jeffrey Lieberman

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography: Science and Academia

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the science and academia work group.

Medicine Start‑class Low‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Start	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

OTRS

This is to notify you and other editors that the Wikimedia OTRS team has received an official permission to use material from http://asp.cumc.columbia.edu/facdb/psychiatry/search.asp and pages linked from it under CC-BY-SA. Therefore, you are authorized and requested, when you add content from that site to Wikipedia, to add the following tag to the talk page of the article in question:

The content of this article has been derived in whole or part from http://asp.cumc.columbia.edu/facdb/psychiatry/search.asp,http://columbiapsychiatry.org/about/annualreport_08/index.html,http://columbiapsychiatry.org/about/annualreport_08/ReseachDivisions.pdf. Permission has been received from the copyright holder to release this material . Evidence of this has been confirmed and stored by VRT volunteers, under ticket number 2009073010059227.
This template is used by approved volunteers dealing with the Wikimedia volunteer response team system (VRTS) after receipt of a clear statement of permission at permissions-enwikimedia.org. Do not use this template to claim permission.

If any users have any queries about this permission, please feel free to contact me or any other OTRS user. Stifle (talk) 08:14, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

I am employed as a Research Scientist by the New York State Psychiatric Institute (NYSPI), at the Columbia University Medical Center (CUMC). As part of my duties, I work as an editor in the Department of Psychiatry in CUMC. The material I am contributing is biographical material about faculty members in the Department, whom I know personally, as they are my colleagues. The material consists of facts contained in the profiles of faculty members that appear on the Department's website. All of the faculty members have reviewed and approved the content I am submitting.

The material does not express a point of view or an opinion with respect to the profiles of the faculty. Rather, as noted above, it consists only of facts about the faculty. Psychiatry777 (talk) 20:37, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links

Articles should not have external links in the middle of the text. It's far better to link to the Wikipedia article (if one exists), or to use these links as reliable sources (if that's the point), or to just have plain old text. Wikipedia is not a web directory, so we don't try to provide links to (e.g.,) academic journals just to prove that they exist. WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:19, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think I removed most of those. Thank you for mentioning that. -SusanLesch (talk) 17:18, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism

There are unattributed opinions in the article stated in Wikipedia's voice, this is completely unacceptable. I have tagged the article for several problems but the hagiographic style and unattributed dismissal of criticism about Lieberman's role in the death of Dan Markingson is most egregious. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 13:17, 10 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The "article" is just one big advert for the subject and should be deleted or substantially rewritten, with appropriate references to reliable sources to support notability. At the moment, it has one.--ukexpat (talk) 17:39, 10 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm concerned about the entire Controversy section of this page. Are his industry connections more glaring or important than those of any other high-level clinical researcher? A section documenting his various disclosures over time seems quite odd. Likewise with the "Criticism" subsection, which seems written as if by someone with a personal vendetta. I also couldn't find any indication of "criticism from an ex-patient" in the links present, and am unsure of notability if it were there. The sentence about "remov[ing] anti-psychotic drugs from patients" also attributes direct action to him rather than involvement in a research study, but the sentence has been reverted before and I don't want an edit war. Jhgtg (talk) 03:56, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Tweet from 21 February 2022

I've edited the tweet citations to be in the proper Cite Tweet format. Because this section appears to be a hot-button issue, I'm opening up the conversation here on the talk page to prevent vandalism in the edits. For reference, the comment I included in my last edit, which undid an edit omitting the tweet controversy, stated the following to kick us off here: Wikipedia allows tweets as sources so long as the criteria at WP:TWITTER are met. Because the cited tweets refer exclusively to Dr. Lieberman's own original tweet, in which he is speaking only on events related to himself, these citations are acceptable. Further debate should occur on the talk page, not in the edits. Cogitamus Credimus (talk) 02:22, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please remove this section unless something citable under WP:RS can be used. As emphasized in WP:BLP, "Contentious material about living persons [...] that is unsourced or poorly sourced [...] should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion." This clearly qualifies. ScienceFlyer (talk) 03:10, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]