Talk:Daniel Paul Schreber

Untitled

why is this marked law related?

Daniel Paul Schreber was a noted German judge, therefore I imagine that must be why.

[User: Calibanu] 11.44. 25 March 2006

The entire article deals with psychological issues. There is no discussion of legal matters other than stating that Schreber was a judge. --Albert einlime 23:25, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Ron Moule

Why has Ron Moule written underneath External Links?? This is not the place for personal thoughts/opinions as intelligent or interesting as they may be.. Why not provide a link to a page of Ron's discussion? Someone please delete this. I tried to but it was reinstated. Adam 217.144.92.212 (talk) 02:41, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Nazi Child Raising

This article doesn't mention that the father of Daniel Paul Schreber was publically known during his life and later came to be known as "The Father of Nazi Child Raising," and that he (the father) believed a child must learn by the time they were a year old that their only freedom lay in submitting to their father. I read Morton Schatzman's book back in the 1980s and can't remember at the moment if I read about D. G. M. Schreber in M. Scott Peck's People of the Lie or if it was in an early book on child abuse about the father's cruel proclivities. I will locate the information--probably have it in my notes. P.S. you might note that Niederland, worked with Nazi concentration camp survivors and later with the Vietnam Veteran's group that developed the concept of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder for the DSM II, which means he was a first-hand witness to the long-term effects of trauma. (Have previously written as Margaret9Mary--have forgotten my password)205.167.120.201 (talk) 20:11, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

books dumped into references

@Maurice Magnus:, can you enlighten us why you added a whole bunch of books into references with no change of substance in the article contents or adding references to something within the article that is currently unreferenced? "references" means, as the word implies, are sources where particular claims within the prose came from. So, I am not getting why you're dropping a list of books without any context. Graywalls (talk) 12:37, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

I have replied elsewhere, but, because I don't know where to reply, I'll reply here too. Some bibliographies on Wikipedia are under the heading "References," some are under "Scholarship," some are under "Further Reading," and so forth. Therefore, I didn't understand "References" as narrowly as you do. But what is the harm in adding books about the subject of a Wikipedia entry even if they don't refer to specific contents in that entry? Some readers might find it useful to know about such books. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maurice Magnus (talk • contribs)

• Unfortunately, there is sometimes little consistency in these things, despite the style manual. In general though, Notes are for the actual footnotes, References are the full bibliographic listings for those sources cited. Further reading is often included to list some sources in the topic that are not part of the cited sources. Again, this is far from consistent across Wikipedia and I haven't looked through the Reference section of this article deeply enough to know if that list corresponds to the Notes or cited sources. I also didn't look at Maurice Magnus's suggested additions, but some of that might be useful to include in a Further reading section. It's confusing and per WP:BITE we try not to scare off editors adding things in good faith. I'm of the opinion that more relevant information is useful for readers and a Further reading section is a good addition to this article. freshacconci (✉) 14:41, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Freshacconci, would you please add a Further Reading section to Daniel Paul Schreber's entry, and I'll list the books that Graywalls removed? Or at least please direct me to instructions on how to add a Further Reading section. Thank you. Maurice MagnusMaurice Magnus (talk) 20:15, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Someone added a Further Reading section to Daniel Paul Schreber's entry, so I added to that section a book by William Niederland, because it is one of the most important books in the Schreber literature. Within hours, someone deleted the book. Its deletion appears irrational to me. What is going on?

How many mental illnesses?

The article begins "Daniel Paul Schreber... was a German judge who suffered from *three distinct* mental illnesses." It then goes on to mention only *one* mental illness - dementia praecox / schizophrenia. Or perhaps the author meant to write 'three episodes of mental illness'? ... But if so, why mention two episodes in the introduction? I think this needs to be resolved one way or the other: either add '3 distinct *episodes* of mental illness' (and then give the dates) or delete reference to the three distinct illnesses altogether 84.69.59.244 (talk) 16:17, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Paul Schreber.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:37, 15 December 2022 (UTC)