This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Sources are saying NY deal is done and a vote is “imminent”. We might have a good chance to clean up and expand related articles. ☆ Bri (talk) 19:24, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
Followup: AP reported in the last hour it is a done deal "expected to be signed into law in the coming days". ☆ Bri (talk) 19:40, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
It's possible this will go through the legislature tomorrow (Tuesday)(AP), maybe even getting the governor’s signature the same day. ☆ Bri (talk) 03:10, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
It has been signed into law.[1] I'm going to start updating the various maps and US cannabis articles now before the IP editors make their ham-fisted attempts. :D --Jamesy0627144 (talk) 15:25, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
Virginia medical
Virginia is now considered to be have legalized medical cannabis according to various sources such as NCSL, MPP, NORML, and ProCon, due to changes to the program that were made within the past year. I just thought I would give a heads up here before revising a few more articles to reflect that, even though the point may be kind of moot soon once Virginia legalizes recreational.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 18:54, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
Hi Bri. Those are pretty much the main organizations in the US that track cannabis policy and that provide an updated map / list of states that have legalized medical cannabis. The only other main one is Americans for Safe Access and they show Virginia as not having fully legalized medical cannabis. However, the information on their website appears to be outdated as there is no mention of bills passed in 2020 and 2021 such as the one that increased the allowable THC.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 20:10, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
D Decriminalized Notes: · Reflects law of states and territories, including laws which have not yet gone into effect. Does not reflect federal, tribal, or local laws. · Hemp and hemp-derived products have been legal since passage of the 2018 Farm Bill.
Currently the US cannabis map shows Idaho and Nebraska as the only two states that have not passed low-THC, high-CBD medical cannabis laws. While this may technically be true, both of these states allow the general sale of CBD products to the public (see here and here), and both allow Epidiolex to be prescribed as it is legal in all 50 states now. Considering this, I don't think it makes sense to have separate colors for "Legal for medical use, limited THC content" and "Illegal for any use" anymore. I therefore would like to trim the map down to just 3 colors as shown to the right, but wanted to give a heads up here first as it is kind of a significant change affecting multiple pages. Other pages that would need to be edited are Legality of cannabis by U.S. jurisdiction (to modify the color column) and Template:Cannabis in the United States.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 15:25, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
So as mentioned above this will change will also require a change to Template:Cannabis in the United States. Here is what I came up with regarding what that would look like.
Also, I've been going back and forth regarding what to label the gray color in the legend, and now I'm thinking just label it "Illegal" instead of "Neither of the above". So I changed the graphic to the right to reflect that.
Maybe a new footnote that hemp and hemp-derived materials including CBD are nationally legal? ☆ Bri (talk) 20:59, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
My preference would probably be to just obliterate the entire notes section except for "Includes laws which have not yet gone into effect." Don't you think that the notes section is getting rather bloated?--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 02:59, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
For anyone else following and concerned about a radical change in colors, you can refer to this MPP map which is essentially the same.
We should try to make the map as self-explanatory as possible. I'm uneasy completely eliminating the notes. How about this?
Notes:
· Reflects law of states and territories, including laws which have not yet gone into effect; does not reflect federal, tribal or local laws.
· Hemp and hemp-derived products have been legal since passage of the 2018 Farm Bill.
That seems like a step in the right direction Bri. The note about hemp and hemp-derived products though – is that referring to federal law or is it referring to the hemp / CBD being legal in the states?--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 16:47, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
Federal, I'm not sure down to the state level where (if anywhere) prohibition of hemp and hemp-derived products is still being attempted; however, under a number of legal analyses like USDA's, the federal law pre-empts state attempts to regulate transportation, which in any practical sense may turn out to pre-empt prohibition at all. There may be some weak case at the state level to regulate CBD as a drug while remaining clear of the federal preemption, but again I think there are going to be legal problems with that theory. Especially since according to FDA, CBD isn't even an approved drug [2] so all sales currently are under the umbrella of food, unregulated dietary supplement, or other nonmedical use. The states are probably going to be left in the long term with the option of requiring specific product testing and labeling, but prohibition is way behind us now. ☆ Bri (talk) 18:03, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
OK, sounds reasonable. I would probably split up the first note into two sentences, but other than that I think that it is good what you came up with... especially the first note that condenses a lot of the previous information. I updated the graphic on the right to incorporate all of this.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 16:17, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
The Origins of Sour Diesel
The "Origin" section of Sour Diesel is sorely lacking, and flat out wrong. It's only reference to an article that itself is misleading. I have tried repeatedly to update it, even leaving the misleading reference in the section. But each time the author reverted it. Even the most basic research proves this section to be misleading and or down right false. This is just the sort of thing that make Wikipedia unreliable as a reference and it should be changed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RigDigBamWham (talk • contribs) 17:26, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
@RigDigBamWham: Then. Change. It. What do you get from complaining if you're not willing to improve articles. Wikipedia is volunteers, there's no customer relations you can ask to get round to clearing out what you think is wrong. Of course, just because your buddy told you an origin doesn't mean it's correct, either. Kingsif (talk) 02:45, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
I think Kingsif missed the fact you already tried changing it. RigDigBarnWham, per WP:3RR, you should try creating a discussion on Talk:Sour Diesel about this. It looks like your edits (assuming you were the IP) were reverted because KoA does not consider alchimiaweb to be a reliable source. I do not know enough about it to know if that was the right call or not, but you should find other reliable sources to back up those claims. Hope this helps. //Lollipoplollipoplollipop::talk05:03, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
USA Track and Field
USA Track and Field said "the merit of the World Anti-Doping Agency rules related to THC should be reevaluated" after effectively banning Sha'Carri Richardson from the 2021 Olympics. Not sure where to put this. The Richardson bio seems to be getting a little heavy on cannabis policy. ☆ Bri (talk) 01:25, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
I don't think there would be any shortage of material for making that article considering all of the athletes that have been suspended for marijuana use over the years and the efforts that have been undertaken to try to get various sports organizations to change their policies regarding cannabis (especially the NFL which I am somewhat familiar with, having written a large portion of the articles for players such as Eugene Monroe, Derrick Morgan, Kyle Turley, and Eben Britton). Could also include a list of all the athletes that have now gone into the cannabis industry which is getting to be a very large number. Unfortunately I don't really have much time to pitch in on the effort but it does sound like a good idea.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 15:53, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
Good idea on the list of athletes who went into cannabis industry. There's an interesting family business in Kamilche or Shelton, Washington that should be included: Joy Hollingsworth is a partner, and former college basketball coach. Also Shawn Kemp, former Sonics, opened a Seattle retail location. They both happen to be BIPOC, I think we will find more with RS stating reasons why ([3]), which should be treated accurately and with care. ☆ Bri (talk) 16:22, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
Denver, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Hog FarmTalk05:17, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
Amazon no longer testing employees for THC metabolites
Adjust text - it's reported to be scheduled for a Rules Committee hearing on Monday, then probably a floor vote later; the floor vote could be as soon as Monday. Possibly worth adding to the article? the Rules Committee Chairman is Jim McGovern who campaigned on "moving those [legalization] bills to the House floor". ☆ Bri (talk) 23:26, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
I created a new article and wondered if someone in the Cannabis WikiProject can review the article. It's in queue with over 1000 articles and this is important to occupational health and hazards with new cannabis and product safety. Any suggestions or senior editors who can help? Thanks! I'm not a new Wikipedian but new to the space of writing about Cannabis. sheridanford (talk) 16:33, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
Broccoli - editor reverted my additions to the talk page
I was thinking about Cannabis and Broccoli, and so I looked at what Wikipedia had to say about it. As it turns out nothing, so I wrote a short note on the Broccoli talk page mentioning the connection and giving a list of sources. But now it is gone. I have seen a lot of dismissive behavior on Wikipedia, but the editor Zefr just reverted my edits to a talk page. I had provided six sources for the symbolic connection between Broccoli and Cannabis. To be clear, I didn't vandalize the article, I didn't even change the article. I just added the information to the talk page, so others can see and discuss this. I do not understand why anyone would revert this. I do not understand why anyone would revert a talk page (except when its obvious vandalism). I feel personally offended, so it is probably not a good idea for me to continue. Can someone please look into this? --91.64.59.86 (talk) 19:10, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for your contributions to discussion. Without looking beyond the diffs you provide, it does seem dismissive and inappropriate for a user to remove good faith talkpage edits without even leaving a reason. But there may be little point to looking for recourse, and you can bring a discussion about broccoli and cannabis to this talkpage, we'll be happy to have you! Kingsif (talk) 12:39, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
And at the article itself. My mistake, adding the WikiProject banner, but they're not disproving their steamroller-y, uncivil reputation, and are now trying to destroy the article and hammer me. Any input or a quick shooing would be appreciated; the potential for more shitty WPMed editor encounters is almost making me want to not develop cannabis articles, which I'm sure is exactly what the WP:JERKs want. Kingsif (talk) 15:22, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
An interesting approach from someone who has just asked for people to "help facilitate discussion" between WikiProject Medicine and WikiProject Cannabis [4], I've got to say... AndyTheGrump (talk) 15:39, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
That was before you decided to start removing everything about which you could make the vaguest subjective argument didn't belong. Let me rescind the offer formally, then, since you have shown the exact opposite of collaborative spirit since it was made and clearly had no intention to take it up. Must be true what they say about giving an inch. Edit: also not a fan of you following me here just to mock me. Kingsif (talk) 16:28, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
This project and the other project are not going to see eye to eye on a lot of things, at least not this decade, I'm afraid. I'd say stick with the subjective-qua-subjective (color, smell, taste, etc.) or pure historical fact, and leave anything vaguely medical out of the DYK nomination. And try to make your hooks go back to unimpeachable sources, like books from publishers who have a Wikipedia article, or A-list newspapers. I'll let you know that I've butted heads with DYK reviewers before and there's no "winning" there. ☆ Bri (talk) 15:51, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
@Bri: I didn’t say thanks for the advice in this message; and I’ll add that you can feel free to trout me when I don’t take it. Kingsif (talk) 19:36, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
Kevin Sabet needs a good going-over. It has POV language like describing New Jersey legalization as a "push to commercialize marijuana". Plus extensive laudatory use of the subject's own writing as sources, for example citing a NYT editorial written by the subject, citing five of his own testimonies to various legislatures, and nearly the entirety of the bibliography section. Other markers of PR include the hallmark terms "He spoke in front of..." and "he was seen at..." ☆ Bri (talk) 03:46, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
The Arizona Mirror essay linked above is ~4,000 words and has compatible licensing with Wikipedia. It looks like a good source for an update of the U.S. legalization articles or articles on individual pending bills, either as a source, or just copy-paste (due to licensing; don't forget attribution in the edit summary). ☆ Bri (talk) 15:01, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14. (John Smith "[https://www.deprecated.com/article Article of things]" ''Deprecated.com''. Accessed 2020-02-14.)
It will work on a variety of links, including those from {{cite web}}, {{cite journal}} and {{doi}}.
The script is mostly based on WP:RSPSOURCES, WP:NPPSG and WP:CITEWATCH and a good dose of common sense. I'm always expanding coverage and tweaking the script's logic, so general feedback and suggestions to expand coverage to other unreliable sources are always welcomed.
Do note that this is not a script to be mindlessly used, and several caveats apply. Details and instructions are available at User:Headbomb/unreliable. Questions, comments and requests can be made at User talk:Headbomb/unreliable.
Yeah I always get excited whenever I see one of the articles I've worked on linked to from somewhere or plagiarized. I guess most people wouldn't like being plagiarized but I love it as a wikipedian (probably others do to)... although I'm not sure if that's technically plagiarism if it's from wikipedia. As for pageviews, I also like to check those from time to time and have noticed that a lot of the cannabis policy articles went down a lot in views since the pandemic started.... especially the "Cannabis in [state]" articles. I'm not sure why that is but some of them should be going back up again with the election coming up.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 21:39, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
Looks good. I prefer the old one slightly because the cannabis leaf is bigger and more visible, but the new design on the other hand is a little more sleek. If we can keep both that would be great.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 01:18, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
Expanding List to regular article: Women in the cannabis industry
I've been editing a list article. The more I expand the list article which already had several paragraphs at the start, the more I realize it should probably be a separate article. I've never done this before. Any help would be appreciated. I left a note on the talk page. Women in the Cannabis Industrysheridanford (talk) 21:58, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
That's cool Bri. I guess since it passed with a veto-proof majority wikipedia could be updated now even though it's maybe not official yet. My personal preference is to wait for signature but if you want to do that it's fine too. There are still a few more pages that need to be updated.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 01:53, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
Since there were no takers, I went ahead and created a 2023 page. Feel free to take over ... a new graphic design would be nice! ☆ Bri (talk) 19:37, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
Project-independent quality assessments
Quality assessments are used by Wikipedia editors to rate the quality of articles in terms of completeness, organization, prose quality, sourcing, etc. Most wikiprojects follow the general guidelines at Wikipedia:Content assessment, but some have specialized assessment guidelines. A recent Village pump proposal was approved and has been implemented to add a |class= parameter to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, which can display a general quality assessment for an article, and to let project banner templates "inherit" this assessment.
No action is required if your wikiproject follows the standard assessment approach. Over time, quality assessments will be migrated up to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, and your project banner will automatically "inherit" any changes to the general assessments for the purpose of assigning categories.
However, if your project has decided to "opt out" and follow a non-standard quality assessment approach, all you have to do is modify your wikiproject banner template to pass {{WPBannerMeta}} a new |QUALITY_CRITERIA=custom parameter. If this is done, changes to the general quality assessment will be ignored, and your project-level assessment will be displayed and used to create categories, as at present. Aymatth2 (talk) 20:53, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
Did you all see this? DEA considers Delta 8 illegal when synthesized from CBD. AFAIK, that is how most Delta 8 products are made. What articles need to be updated? Esb5415 (talk) 12:51, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
I was going to start writing up a new cannabis hoax, that Martha Stewart is developing a cannabis brand. Turns out it might not be so far fetched. Here's an AP story; there are others including The Atlantic and Washington Post. This doesn't appear to be covered in the bio article at this time. ☆ Bri (talk) 22:08, 29 August 2023 (UTC)