Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cannabis/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3

4/20 editathon

Main page: Wikipedia:WikiProject Cannabis/420 Collaboration
Extended content

I know we're several months away, but how do project members feel about an 4/20 (April 20) editathon with the goal of creating and improving cannabis-related Wikipedia articles and adding images to Wikimedia Commons? Our efforts could be interpreted as a joke, or deemed controversial, but I think some solid outreach to Wiki Project Med and other WikiProjects could bring some cred and integrity to the campaign. We could identify needed articles and encourage folks to work in all sorts of fields: medical, political, legislative, cultural, etc. Could be fun with even just a few participants. Any thoughts? ---Another Believer (Talk) 01:30, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

Overall I'm down, but if we want to get ambitious, should we try to get non-WP folks involved somehow? If nothing else with photos, maybe we could coordinate with some cannabis organizations or media to challenge people to make sure each state/country has a photo that represents cannabis in that area? Though I recognize that anonymity is kind of an issue because in some cases that's asking folks to photo something technically illegal and upload it.
I'm definitely down with asking other current editors to help, but if it's plausible it'd be interesting to encourage more folks to get involved in Wikipedia via their interest in cannabis. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 22:16, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
I'm all for encouraging non-Wikipedian involvement, though I admit I'm more familiar with on-wiki outreach. If there are enough interested participants, perhaps we can divide and conquer, which is why I wanted to start this conversation sooner than later. And yes, I see your concern re: anonymity and legal issues, but also keep in mind some people live in jurisdictions with legal cannabis. I've already asked a couple cannabis shops here in Oregon if they'd be willing to let me photograph cannabis strains in their store, and they seemed very open to the idea. Of course, people in Alaska, Colorado, and Washington could also help out, since they have shops (unlike Washington, D.C., if I'm remembering correctly). ---Another Believer (Talk) 22:23, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

So, all this content forking, new article creation, and reorganizing project members are completing lately is the sort of stuff I had in mind for the 4/20 editathon, but perhaps it's actually better than this grunt work is out of the way and now people can find more specific articles to improve. Thanks again to all who have been working on this project. ---Another Believer (Talk) 00:45, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Might I recommend one article to target for the editathon: 420 (cannabis culture). Year after year, the Wikipedia:Top 25 Report notes this article making the charts on 4/20 week (in 2016 it came in fourth for that week), and notes year after year We also note the article remains, every year, far too laid back to seek to improve any further from Start Class. Might it be a goal of the project to somehow get the article up to C class in time for 4/20? Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 03:51, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
Whoops, turns out that in May 2016 User:John Broughton assessed it as C class, so that's one target down. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 03:54, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

What shall we call our campaign/editathon, and on what dates might this take place? ---Another Believer (Talk) 19:26, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

I've expressed interested in supporting a "420" editathon, and User:Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney has as well. I am creating a 420 Collaboration subpage to start fleshing out ideas. I invite all to contribute, and very much welcome creativity and outreach volunteers. ---Another Believer (Talk) 03:42, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

I suggest we make it 42 days long; enough time to make some progress but short enough for a sense of urgency. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 08:33, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
I like the symbolism, but I think 42 days is a bit long for an online collaboration. What do you think about Saturday, April 15 through Sunday, April 30 (essentially the second half of April)? This time frame includes two complete work weeks and weekends, and several holidays: Easter, Tax Day, April 20, and Earth Day. ---Another Believer (Talk) 20:19, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
15-30 April sounds good to me. If you want to cover inviting the theme-based WikiProjects when the time comes, I can do the country-based WPs and give them specific goals/challenges for new and improving articles. We have a good and growing collection of redlinks (I've been adding a bunch of existing articles in other languages needing translation), and the cannabis-stub category, but is there somewhere we should compile existing articles most in need of review/expansion/improvement? As a noteworthy example, bhang gets like 300,00+ views/yr and it's terribly under-sourced and full of OR. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 12:02, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Have you considered contacting the Education Ambassadors (or whatever they're called) to see if maybe a college class is interested in assigning students to write cannabis articles for the 420? I imagine some would find that an engaging topic. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 02:59, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

Another suggestion, tell me if this is too far off-base. Do we have anyone here who's active on Reddit on cannabis topics? If so (or if necessary I can start a Reddit account) we could post an announcement of the Editathon there shortly before it starts. Similarly, even though we assume some risk of drawing unskilled editors in, we could WP:BEBOLD and send a Press Release to The Cannabist, High Times, etc. asking them to publicize the editathon. That might involve us having to do more hand-holding, or well-intentioned flubs getting deleted, but it could also result in some useful new contributors. I assume we'd have to (or be best advised to) contact Wikimedia before contacting the press to make sure we're doing it appropriately, and/or clarify that the Editathon is a private volunteer endeavor and not necessarily endorsed by the Wikimedia Foundation?
Also if we're open to inviting in newbie editors, I'm working on a draft of "Things we need and don't need" that we could post on the Editathon page, explaining how to check the Redlinks and Stubs lists, how to figure out if a topic is notable and source reliable, and cautioning folks against quoting forums, fansites, advocacy pages, and other non-RSs, and pointing out that MEDRS is a requirement for any medical claims. What do you think? Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 02:46, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
I am not familiar with Reddit but would support your attempt to promote the event there, if that's appropriate. More details to come, and I'm happy to get your feedback/suggestions about what we would want a press release to look like, but I am already in touch with Seattle Hempfest staff to draft a possible press release and help distribute information about our efforts to cannabis organizations and media throughout the United States. Reaching out to the Wikimedia Foundation is a fantastic idea. Is this something you would like to pursue? I know several WMF staffers, including those on the Communications team, but I certainly don't want to step on your toes if you want to send a few messages and see where it goes. I look forward to seeing what you draft re: editathon do's and dont's. Feel free to update the campaign page directly, or share ideas on its talk page, since now there are other people who are wanting to support this collaboration but may not be watching this WikiProject Cannabis talk page. Actually, I think we should start using that talk page more, and keeping this talk page reserved for more WikiProject-wide discussions. ---Another Believer (Talk) 02:54, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
I don't know any WMF folks, so if you'd like to contact them I'm cool with that, though I can do it if for whatever reason you'd rather not. If you want I can contact a few major cannabis websites once we have a clear method by which we can phrase it so we aren't undermining WMF's authority or sending a wrong message.
I agree we should start moving all the Editathon content over to that Talk page, maybe splice this very thread over there, and maybe a banner at the top of the main WPCannabis talk page to let folks know to refer over there for any 420Collab (or however we're abbreviating it) so that folks don't miss it?
Once we have the ball clearly rolling on having a talk page for the 420Collab, let me know and to save you time I can be the guy do to the grindwork of tracking down everyone currently involved in editing Cannabis topics and inviting them to the Collab talk page. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 03:05, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
@Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney: 1.) I'd be happy to reach out to the WMF folks and see if they have any concerns or suggestions. I will add a task here as a reminder to myself. 2.) I'd be fine with you reaching out to cannabis website once we feel the time is right. Feel free to add a task to the "To Do" list, if you'd like. I'd love to have an ongoing and updated list of action items so we can all see the current status. 3.) Glad you're on board to use Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cannabis/420 Collaboration for further discussion. I've collapsed some early content within this section, and I invite you to transfer any contents over to the campaign's talk page as new sections if further discussion is needed about any points raised here. 4.) The "420" collaboration is mentioned in the "Announcements" section at Wikipedia:WikiProject Cannabis, and as a "main page" above. I've already invited all WikiProject Cannabis members to participate via talk page notices, so I'm not sure more updates to the WikiProject are necessary right now, but I'm open to suggestions. You're welcome to invite other Wikipedia editors you think may be interested in contributing, though do be on the lookout for those who may have already received an invite from me. ---Another Believer (Talk) 05:15, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

She Shoulda Said No! on the Main Page

Nice to see She Shoulda Said No! on Wikipedia's Main Page today, receiving some constructive edits as a result. Happy editing! ---Another Believer (Talk) 17:24, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

This reminds me, maybe we can request the appearance of some cannabis-related content around the 420 collaboration? ---Another Believer (Talk) 17:25, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
Good call, we just need to decide what article would be a good example. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 04:47, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
Well, currently She Shoulda Said No! is the project's only Featured article (Category:FA-Class Cannabis articles). There are a few Good articles (Category:GA-Class Cannabis articles), but it looks like the DYK section is the only way to get cannabis-related content on the Main Page. ---Another Believer (Talk)

Sanjay Gupta's cannabis series

Sanjay Gupta did a series of "weed" specials, called Weed, Weed 2: Cannabis Madness, and Weed 3: The Marijuana Revolution. Does anyone have a sense as to whether or not these documentaries are individually notable, collectively notable, or not notable at all? You can find tons of information about Gupta and his thoughts on weed, but I'm wondering if these specials should have their own Wikipedia article, or three. Thoughts? ---Another Believer (Talk) 00:51, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

For a bit more context, I am trying to add cannabis documentary films to Wikipedia:WikiProject Cannabis/Redlinks. There are many documentary films, but if we're going to add them to this list for folks to consider working on, I'd prefer to make sure they're notable beforehand. Feel free to add more cannabis-related books, films, and other media to the redlinks list. ---Another Believer (Talk) 01:08, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Can the project add a To-Do list to the main page, portal, or whatever?

 Done

I've been making a list of redlinks I encounter; other than just this Talk page, is there somewhere on this project that we can formally compile a to-do list of needed articles, such that incoming folks can easily see what we lack? It'll also be good for targets for an upcoming 4/20 editathon.

Here's my current list:

Suggestions where to start collecting these? Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 00:31, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Let's start with the main page? I'll try adding a "Needed articles" list, and feel free to modify as you see fit. ---Another Believer (Talk) 02:19, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
I added the newly-created Redlinks module to the main page. You can modify the list of needed articles by editing the module, and you can change the order of modules by editing the main page. ---Another Believer (Talk) 02:24, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
Another Believer, I recommend trying out the new Wikipedia Requests system with the {{Wikipedia Requests}} template. Let me know if you need any assistance. Harej (talk) 01:46, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
I'll be very interested to see this tool develop! It doesn't seem to be quite working yet, is there an estimated timeline? Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 09:01, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
It should be working now, Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney. What is happening when you try to use it? Harej (talk) 09:11, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
Oh, the "We just started work on this, so check back later!" message threw me off; I see there's a "search" and an "add" function now, but not seeing the more useful functions like a "see all Spain redlinks" or whatnot that would be useful for browsing. Is the intent that at some point as the site develops we could see all the redlinks for, say, this WikiProject? Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 09:29, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

I'd like to chime in, reviewing this project, and hoping it leads to improvements. I think the cannabis topic on Wikipedia has huge holes. The biggest gap is centered around the 1980s, I think. Two missing articles immediately come to mind: (1) I can't imagine why there's no article for Sinsemilla Tips. The magazine was published for ten years and had a wide circulation. And during Sinsemilla Tips run, the magazine completely outclassed High Times. I believe the advertisers were targeted by the DEA, shutting down publication. And (2) Can an article be started for the San Marcos Seven? Please. I think it is encyclopedic, particularly--American cannabis political prisoners on hunger strike force-fed intravenously in prison infirmary. I have an original piece about the San Marcos seven that I wrote in 1993 for an alternate-press publication. I no longer have the list of greater Texas and San Marcos-area newspaper articles that were the sources, however. And none of that stuff is archived on the internet anywhere. Help. -- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 00:19, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

@The Hammer of Thor: Thanks for chiming in, and for adding suggestions to the project's list of red links. This is exactly what we need, and will be helpful to the editors participating in the upcoming 420 collaboration. I agree, the overall quality of cannabis articles is low, hence why we are taking steps to fix this problem. I hope you'll continue updating the list of red links. It is nice to see this WikiProject coming back alive. ---Another Believer (Talk) 02:37, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Okay. I think I have enough information; I will go ahead and start an article for the San Marcos Seven. I'll start now, because I'm slow, to have it in some sort of order in time for the editathon. I trust that once I'm done, someone here will move it from the list of redlinks to the appropriate part of the Tasks section for expansion. -- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 00:45, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
An interesting thing about this project is, once started, one thing leads to another. The more I research the San Marcos Seven, the more I find notable. Before I started, and now even more than before, I think KIND Radio deserves an article. And Joe Ptak. After seeing all the ink these guys have gotten, I'm even beginning to think another of the organizers, Zeal Stefanoff meets WP notability standards, too. (I added his name to the list of redlinks.) -- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 02:38, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for updating the redlinks list. We may discover not all topics are notable, but if we never try, we'll never know! ---Another Believer (Talk) 03:16, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
We're up to around 200 redlinks now, so if even half of those get filled in the next couple years, that's a huge increase. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 03:33, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
I'm really hoping a lot of these red links disappear during the April "420" collaboration. I'm trying to compile a list of notable cannabis documentary films missing articles. ---Another Believer (Talk) 04:34, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Any subcats we're missing in Category:Cannabis?

So far Category:Women in cannabis has been a useful way to re-categorize articles already under other Cannabis trees, and Category:Cannabis prohibition and Category:Cannabis trafficking have bought a bunch of new articles under our tree that were not previously there. I've also worked to spread some of our many categories to fr.wiki and fi.wiki to help break up an overlarge "Category:Cannabis" in those languages. Does anyone have any ideas for other cannabis sub-categories we're missing here at en.wiki? Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 06:03, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Proposed rename of Entheogenic use of cannabis to Cannabis and religion

Please see here: Talk:Entheogenic_use_of_cannabis#Propose_re-titling_to_Cannabis_and_religion. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 05:36, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

I think that's an improvement. -- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 14:28, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
I added some redirect/redlinks for specific religions, like Buddhism, Sikhism, etc. Surely these sections of the Cannabis and religion article could be expanded, but it's also likely standalone articles would be appropriate if the topics were fully fleshed out. ---Another Believer (Talk) 17:52, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Images

Looking for help, I don't know anything about licensing on WP for loading images, so I'll stay away from that.

I started the San Marcos Seven page for the April 20 project. (Thank you whoever put the proper info box for images onto the talk page.)

I'm not counting on finding pictures to go with the article, though a shot of the tent city would be glorious, it's unlikely.

Then it dawned on me that there're probably mugshots of them, and wouldn't that be marvelously appropriate.... Joe Gaddy - Jeffrey Stefanoff - Joe Ptak - Bill O'Rourke ... Guess what? I found four of the San Marcos Seven.

Are mugshots public? Does anyone know about this kind of thing, here? If they are something that WP can use, should they be left individual, or could the four be combined into one image for an article like this?

If we can't use them, that's all right too. But we should, if we can. -- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 00:47, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

I apologize for my computer ineptness. I can barely use email. The links I put above redirect, so please copy and paste the urls manually. -- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 23:35, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
Not likely. These appears to be works by government employees in Texas which isn't one of the states that puts their government works in the public domain automatically. Sizeofint (talk) 06:23, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
Thank you. I'm unsure if that's true. Some research led me to the conclusion here, Template talk:Ir-Mugshot, that mugshots are not protected by copyright. Laws concerning disclosure of information, data protection and privacy may be applicable. -- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 04:07, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
Hmm, that page isn't too conclusive on this matter. It might be best to create a thread on Commons on this topic. In any case, fair use would probably apply even if they aren't PD. Sizeofint (talk) 04:33, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Anywhere to compile articles needing expansion/update?

I can start making a list, but is there anywhere to formally keep a list (including for the Collab) so that folks can get some ideas of where we need work on existing articles?

Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 22:59, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Great idea. I suggest keeping a list going here, then maybe we can move it over to the 420 collaboration once the campaign is live. ---Another Believer (Talk) 01:26, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
Here is another newly-created article that may be of interest: Marijuana policy of the Donald Trump administration. ---Another Believer (Talk) 00:37, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
I want to move that article to Cannabis....but will wait till real info is avaliable.Moxy (talk) 00:54, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
Prior to the Spicer comments this week, I would've said it's a little early to have Marijuana policy of the Donald Trump administration, but at this point I'm satisfied it's a valid standalone topic with room for expansion. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 04:32, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Just thought folks might find my current little project interesting. I'm trying to link in the category trees for cannabis articles across languages, and have had some interesting experiences.

  • Prior to my starting, I think only English, Persian, and French had Category:Cannabis by country. I've grouped articles together to make the equivalent cat elsewhere, and we now have that cat in the following languages: Czech, Spanish, Croatian, Indonesian, Italian, Hebrew, Dutch, Portuguese, Russian, Serbian, Finnish, and Swedish.
    • I tried creating it in German, but a body of editors there discussed it and shot it down for being unnecessary sub-categorization (clearly I disagree). Someone at Russian Wikipedia raised the same objection, but others voted to keep it. I tried it at Catalan Wikipedia, but they have a policy there requiring a minimum of five articles per category, so no
  • I know doctrinally you shouldn't use autotranslate into langauges you don't know, but I figure folks could delete them pretty quickly if they didn't like them, or fix them quickly if they did.
    • So far I've had success with a translation of Cannabis in Finland (cleaned up by a Finnish-speaker who helped me build the English article), Cannabis in Iceland (ditto), and the applicable national-level articles for Slovenia, Croatia, Serbia, Malta, Albania, Norway, Czech Republic, Brazil, and Indonesia.
    • Though I'm far from batting 100, I've had some speedy deletes on Denmark, Hungary, Russia, Italy, Bulgaria, Latvia, Lithuania, and probably a few others. At this point I think I've maxed out the articles I can reasonably try, so the next step will be in April when I'll ask the appropriate WikiProjects to translate the "home" article for a country's language from the English version.

Just thought folks might find it interesting, and this also makes it a lot easier to click to equivalent cats to see what articles English Wikpedia is missing, like you can look at nl:Categorie:Cannabis in Nederland and find a number of articles for Netherlands issues that we don't have an equivalent for (and I've added them to the Redlink list). Just a little update on my hobby-work. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 05:59, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

This is fantastic work, Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney. Thanks for the update. ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:35, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
No worries, it's nerdy fun, like doing a puzzle. I also identified languages that had multiple cannabis articles but no Category:Cannabis, like Urdu and Armenian, and I created a cannabis cat and filed articles under it, and linked it to the other languages in Metawiki. I also sporadically run across articles about cannabis films or political events in other languages that are just filed under film or politics cats, so I add the Cannabis cat to those too to group them together. Overall this has gone really well (other than my getting tut-tutted a few times for being cheeky with auto-translate), with my main gripe being that German Wikipedia wouldn't let me create a by-country cat tree since they have plenty of articles to sort... Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 05:09, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
I've also belatedly realized that a possibly smoother method than "throw a machine-translate out there and see if anybody doesn't hate it", so I've identified a couple languages that have a large section of "by country" under their main Cannabis or Legality of Cannabis articles, and have posted in that language (with gTranslate) suggesting that we divide out those sections to be their own articles, so we can link them to their equivalents in other languages for cross-reference, have them be in category-trees specific to their country, etc. I've suggested this as French, Polish, and Russian, so if folks approve any of those that could greatly expand the number of "by country" articles in other languages, akin to a couple months back when I split out Legality of cannabis and we got like 50 new "by country" articles. We'll see what opinion other wikis have on this; each language Wikipedia has its own culture and politics so it's been a really different experience in each one. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 21:20, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Hmmmm, okay overall conclusions so far having tried mucking around with categories on 20-some language wikis:

  • German Wikipedia runs a very tight ship and has a very clear idea of what they want, and they're apparently really particular about sub-categories. So at this point I'm pretty much giving up on interacting with de.wikipedia unless I have clear agreement from an established member there.
  • Catalan Wikipedia has a clear policy of "minimum of 5 items per category", so tough but clear.
  • Finnish has really tricky grammar, so before I try to create any Finnish sub-cat I need to check with a Finnish Wikipedian I know to make sure it's conjugated/declined right since, man, that is a tricky language. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 05:27, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
A body of editors at French Wikipedia agreed to do just what we did here, and divide up the "by country" sections of their fr:Législation sur le cannabis, so that's another dozen+ country-specific articles now on the French Wikipedia. I've proposed doing the same division on Portuguese Wikipedia. I'm done with German Wikipedia for now, they're pretty persnickety about everything and they haven't seemed to enjoy most things I've tried there. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 05:18, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
Okay, so far at French, Portuguese, Spanish, and Polish I've done the same as I've done here, divided out cited content from a larger cannabis article, to create a number of cited "Cannabis in Xcountry" articles. Got a few more languages to pitch the idea at, but overall it's helping cut down over-large main articles and create a wider inter-linked tree. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 04:47, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
Welp, ru.wiki decided that the "Cannabis by country" tree wasn't useful and kicked all the articles back to Cat:Cannabis, so lost one of the 17 or so countries that had that tree. Can't win them all... Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 02:16, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
A helpful person on ja.wiki showed up to create "by country" cats, which is great since I have zero ability to figure out how Japanese works. I managed to create correct cats in Armenian, Hindi, and Hebrew despite not knowing those alphabets, but Japanese is beyond me. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 05:58, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
Dangit, the whole "Cannabis by country" cat with three articles got deleted on Croatian Wikipedia for being "stubs" and "machine translated". Personally, it's kind of absurd to delete an article for those two things together, since copyediting a stub takes under 60 seconds, but whatever. The same cat/articles persist on Serbian and Serbo-Croatian Wikipedias. And "Cannabis by country" remains on 16 languages despite losing German, Russian, and Croatian. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 04:40, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Using pre-1923 photos of hemp from Wisconsin Historical Society?

I stumbled across a number of photos of cannabis farming on the Wisconsin Historical Society page. Some of them are post-1923, but for the pre-1923 ones are we free to upload them to Wikimedia Commons even through the WHS is claiming "copyright" on them and selling access to them? Pre-1923 in the US is fair game, right? Or do they have some copyright justification if it wasn't published publicly in the US until some date, like it was an old archive/personal photo not previously disseminated? I don't want to chicken out of using their materials just because they claim "copyright", but I want to make sure I'm following the proper rules. I realize I can't make them hand over a high-res image or anything, but the example pics are fine for WP display. Here's the link Suggestions? Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 23:30, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Great question, and thanks for asking. I'm afraid I cannot be of any assistance (I tend to only upload images I've taken myself). If no one else is able to help here, you might try Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Just wanted to share the link in case. I'd love to see many images uploaded and shared in galleries as part of this campaign. ---Another Believer (Talk) 23:41, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
Asked here per advice: Wikipedia:Media_copyright_questions#Using_pre-1923_photos_of_hemp_from_Wisconsin_Historical_Society.3F. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 05:05, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
Agree with you, that what appears is just a 'boiler-plate' claim to copyright. However, that does not help you directly. If you wish to pursue it further ( and hope you and others will) here are some ramblings of other avenues to go down:
The photos appears to be those of a type and style that the manufacturer McCormick Farmall would have commissioned to included in their catalogs for publication ( they obviously were not shot on an amateur `Kodak box'). They would have commissioned a professional. So they very likely have been published.
Here in the UK it would be simple to go visit the British Library. It is a legal requirement that every UK publication is deposited there.[1]. Your Library of Congress may have a similar policy. They are also great places to explore for everything and spend many happy hours getting lost in - whilst the world out-side goes by.
The search I think should focus on the manufacturer: McCormick-Deering Farmall and McCormick Farmall and their trade catalogs.
Much old farming equipment are now 'collectibles' also. There may be some enthusiasts that have old catalogs (with images) etc. You won't believe how much stuff they accumulate. Who knows, their Grandpa might have been a hemp farmer too. These people here may be able to put you in contact with those collectors Farmall Tractor History. Am sure there are many others.
Like the idea of having more photographs (uploaded to Wikimedia Commons) of this once thriving industry that the US exported abroad, to protect William Randolph Hearst's heavy investments in forestry, to supply wood pulp for his newspaper empire at the expense of hemp farmers...
Finally, any research you can do can be placed on Commons:Help desk where they have more in depth knowledge about image copyright. With a bit more background they may be able to blow this blanket 'boiler-plate' claim to copyright right out of the water.--Aspro (talk) 17:13, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

Do we need a general History of cannabis article?

Right now it just redirects to Cannabis (drug)'s "History" section. We have a ton of material scattered over a lot of articles, is there utility to trying to unite some of this material in one centralized location? Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 00:49, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

Moved over some previous content from Cannabis and religion, which I'd briefly put at Ancient use of cannabis, but History of cannabis seemed the best catch-all title. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 17:09, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Endoca

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Endoca. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:16, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

Delsort template

Just a suggestion, but someone might want to ask at WT:DELSORT about having a delsort template specifically created for this WikiProject. This might make it a bit easier for others to notify the project of any AfD discussions of articles which might be of relevance to it. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:26, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

AfD: National Cannabis Industry Association

Resolved

National Cannabis Industry Association has been nominated for deletion. Editors can participate in the ongoing AfD discussion here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/National Cannabis Industry Association. ---Another Believer (Talk) 22:35, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

The result was no consensus. ---Another Believer (Talk) 17:38, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

Can more folks watchlist Jimmy Cournoyer for spam?

We have an SPA who keeps trying to promote a book there despite many explanations of needing third-party coverage. I don't want to 3RR, so can more folks watchlist? Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 02:43, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

Can someone update breaking events at Cannabis in South Africa?

I'm traveling for a few days (but will send out 420 media invites mid-week) but in the meantime we have a barrage of well-meaning IPs making big South Africa changes without citations. Can someone check the recent news and add cutting-edge facts and if appropriate update the lede? Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 08:09, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

Streblus asper

There's some ethnobotany information at Streblus asper § Uses that seems to be orphaned from the rest of the cannabis articles. I'm not sure how to approach and incorporate. Maybe someone else can. - Bri (talk) 03:29, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

User group?

I realize this might sound crazy, and for now I mostly want to focus on the upcoming "420" collaboration, but I want to float the idea of a possible Wikimedia user group for WikiProject Cannabis. Before we even get into the weeds about group names, goals, mailing lists, etc., I'd like to first see if there are even 5 people who would support this user group and its efforts. Here is more information about eligibility requirements, and here is more information about how to apply for recognition. I'd also like to give folks an opportunity here to express any major concerns about having an official WMF affiliate related to cannabis, which may not be a contentious topic to everyone reading this discussion, but would likely raise many eyebrows, both within the Wikimedia movement and by member of the public. Thoughts? ---Another Believer (Talk) 20:22, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Support. @Another Believer: you know me, I'm down. This collab actually caught me at a really bad time since I'll be in eight different states over these two weeks (helping family with multiple cross-country moves) and moving myself to Montreal, so that's why I've been sloppily phone-editing a lot while riding shotgun. But yeah, I'm down to help, and if you like also down to raise support from other-language Wikipediae (if you're okay with non-native speakers participating in discussions [not articles] using gTranslate and the like). We have a scattering of cannabis-topic enthusiasts on other-language Wikipediae. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 19:16, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
Fantastic, glad to hear! You've been a huge help to this campaign and I sincerely thank you for your time and effort. ---Another Believer (Talk) 20:42, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

Should Chaim Kanievsky be included in Template:Cannabis in Israel?

Please see dispute re his inclusion in the History of this page: Template:Cannabis in Israel. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 18:10, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

As a matter of fact, there is no dispute. Per WP:BRD it would have been a good idea if the editor who wants to include him in the template started a discussion on the subject. Debresser (talk) 17:18, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
While we're here, related question: should Chaim Kanievsky be filed under Category:Cannabis and religion and/or Category:Cannabis in Israel? Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 17:37, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
The first perhaps, the second probably not. Debresser (talk) 17:57, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
Cool, I shall await consensus. @Debresser: if the topic interests you we have a couple redlinks for other rabbis that have made rulings on cannabis, please feel free to address them should that pique your curiosity. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 19:12, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
We now have Category:Cannabis and Judaism, so same question as to whether Kanievsky should be included there. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 14:56, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
I would think so, being that he gave a halakhic ruling on the subject. Debresser (talk) 11:12, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Perhaps we should make subsections, to keep things easier to oversee?

Should Chaim Kanievsky be included in Category:Cannabis and religion

  • Perhaps He gave a halakhic ruling on the subject of cannabis, so there is some connection, albeit remote. Debresser (talk) 11:12, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
  • No this is a non-issue, that someone brought him cannabis and he ruled on it is not a big deal. People bring him things all the time and this is not so large an issue or event to warrant inclusion in the template. Sir Joseph (talk) 20:21, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Should Chaim Kanievsky be included in Category:Cannabis in Israel

Should Chaim Kanievsky be included in Category:Cannabis and Judaism

  • Yes A halakhic ruling is directly related and in his case notable to Judaism.

Post-collab cleanup!

Collab is done, time for ganja-nerds to do a bit of tidying up (at our own pace) to help streamline the project. Here are a few of my suggestions, feel free to add to this list:

  • Right now many Cannabis templates are sorted to the top of their cat (like [[Category:Cannabis in Australia| ]]) but my understanding is there's some Greek letter that's supposed to be used after the pipe (with no space) to sort templates to the end of the cat? Which letter?
  • Part of this is my biscuit: a bunch of the new cannabis templates have the "Category" link at the bottom, but many don't (I neglected to include it in mine). Should we add that to those missing it?
  • Any other standardizations we should make for the Templates? Should "Works" items always be italic and with a date following them? Should they specify "(film)", "(book)" etc or just the date?
  • Should we separate out pages for Redlinks and Expansion? Is there any cleaner "To Do" format used by other projects that would should imitate?
  • Right now {{WPCannabis}} is the code for Talk pages to add pages to the project. Most other projects use all-caps like {{WPIRAN}}. Should we do whatever "redirects" or whatever so that {{WPCANNABIS}}, {{WPMARIJUANA}}, and {{WP420}} all result in the same tag to add to WPC?
  • Both Category:Cannabis and Category:Cannabis activists have several photos at the bottom, which really aren't our most important photos. Just to clean up the pages, can we not display related photos on those cat pages? Most other projects don't, and I think it looks cluttered.
  • We need to footnote sources for Cannabis in Malta
  • Cannabis in California should be submitted to WP:Guild of Copyeditors since it's a high-profile article and poorly organized
  • Bhang (Indian cannabis term) is one of our most-viewed articles, and it's a wreck of poor sourcing, needs improving
  • Choose standard opening line for all US state articles
  • Move Law Enforcement Against Prohibition to new name
  • Talk to Graphics Lab for larger consensus on fine-tuning color scheme and layout for US Cannabis map, since over the years we simply haven't found a map that doesn't displease some commentators
  • Similar for the global maps, and reconcile them with the chart at Legality of cannabis.

Those are my initial observations. Please add more, and together let's tidy them up and strike them off the list! Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 14:52, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Notability discussion at Talk:Cannabis in China

Your comments welcome to resolve. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 18:12, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Major expansion at Cannabis in South Africa

Props to AWildAppeared (talk · contribs) for fleshing out our ZA coverage! Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 21:39, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

👍 Like ---Another Believer (Talk) 21:43, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
It still needs a lot of work. Thanks for the acknowledgement, Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk · contribs). :) AWildAppeared (talk) 07:00, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
@AWildAppeared: Cannabis in Canada and Cannabis in India have both benefited hugely from regional experts who dove in to do huge expansions, so I'm glad that South Africa has just such a champion as well. Any chance that you know anyone in Capetown who can photograph the Cannabis March next weekend? And/or anyone who might have photos of (anonymous/non-identifiable) people using cannabis in a clearly South African setting? But even without photos, your expansion on history and legal details has been huge, and very timely! Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 14:54, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
@Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney: I make no promises but, if there's not too much traffic tomorrow, I'll head out to the meeting point and snap a few photos before the march starts. AWildAppeared (talk) 15:10, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
AWildAppeared, you have gone above-and-beyond! Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 12:59, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

A shift in drug policy coming?

Of interest to this project: Office of National Drug Control Policy#2017 reported shutdown may be an indication of an impending change in U.S. government policy. It's sort of breaking news and not a lot of details forthcoming yet. Other sources include Fox News, Bloomberg, The Hill and Reason, but they are all speculating at this point. - Bri (talk) 16:16, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

We – Community Tech – are happy to announce that the Popular pages bot is back up-and-running (after a one year hiatus)! You're receiving this message because your WikiProject or task force is signed up to receive the popular pages report. Every month, Community Tech bot will post at Wikipedia:WikiProject Cannabis/Archive 2/Popular pages with a list of the most-viewed pages over the previous month that are within the scope of WikiProject Cannabis.

We've made some enhancements to the original report. Here's what's new:

  • The pageview data includes both desktop and mobile data.
  • The report will include a link to the pageviews tool for each article, to dig deeper into any surprises or anomalies.
  • The report will include the total pageviews for the entire project (including redirects).

We're grateful to Mr.Z-man for his original Mr.Z-bot, and we wish his bot a happy robot retirement. Just as before, we hope the popular pages reports will aid you in understanding the reach of WikiProject Cannabis, and what articles may be deserving of more attention. If you have any questions or concerns please contact us at m:User talk:Community Tech bot.

Warm regards, the Community Tech Team 17:16, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Non-controversial imagery for general WPCannabis barnstar?

We have a collab barnstar, but some folks have suggested something a little less in-your-face for a general WPC barnstar. I went looking for images that get the point across but don't have so strong of cultural connotations. Anyone fancy any of these?

Possible Cannabis Barnstar images
  • Soviet hemp-production medal
    Soviet hemp-production medal
  • Hemp harvest in USSR, 1956
    Hemp harvest in USSR, 1956
  • Nederlands: Negatief. Het oogsten van hennep (Cannabis sativa L.)
    Nederlands: Negatief. Het oogsten van hennep (Cannabis sativa L.)

Please feel free to add any other suggested images, and we can have someone clean them up for a smooth format if we find one we like. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 18:48, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Vote USSR badge vote retracted for AWA's comment below: If folks like the Soviet badge, we can probably find a better-angled photo, then create a derivative work from it and modify it for our purposes. That's my vote so far. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 21:54, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Something to consider: Soviet imagery will probably put off people from Eastern or Central Europe. AWildAppeared (talk) 19:33, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
Man, I missed this initially, but I sure like the Soviet medal. Technically it's from the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic (РСФСР) if that makes a difference. - Bri (talk) 16:20, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
By the way, just mentioning here that I'm going to select the РСФСР flavor barnstar on my own talkpage, hope that is kosher with everybody. - Bri (talk) 17:22, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
Obviously the Russian one. It already is a badge. I don't think that it will call out negative feelings with anybody, as it certainly shouldn't on this brotherly community-based project. Debresser (talk) 20:17, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Cris Ericson nominated for discussion

I could use some help over at Articles for deletion/Cris Ericson (2nd nomination). Thanks in advance. -- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 17:27, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Proposed name change: "Medical cannabis in the United States" to "Medical marijuana in the United States"

Please comment on the talk page of Medical cannabis in the United States. Informata ob Iniquitatum (talk) 04:01, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

I replied on the talk page but also here as well since I think the proposed change involves a bunch of other articles. If one is changed, I think they should all be changed to remain consistent. And there are probably well over a hundred articles with cannabis in the title. So I'd say keep the current title as long as all the other articles use "cannabis".--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 11:58, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

US timeline

The timeline stuff is getting kind of spread out, I wasn't sure where to put the 2017 (effective) extension of the Rohrabacher–Farr amendment. For now it's just added here. But logically it could go in any or all of the below:

Maybe WP Cann. regulars want to discuss? - Bri (talk) 04:11, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

  • I think the only page that needs to be updated is the Rohrabacher–Farr amendment page. The Timeline page already mentions that the Rohrabacher–Farr amendment requires annual renewal, and I think going into any more detail than that is overkill considering the level of detail in the other timeline entries. As far as the Medical cannabis in the United States page, I have been doing a lot of work on that and will add more detail about Rohrabacher–Farr in the future, but probably will not mention specific renewal dates there either. As for the Rohrabacher–Farr amendment page, I will update that shortly, although I might wait for the extension to be officially signed into law later this week. Thank you for the hemp hurds BTW :-) --Jamesy0627144 (talk) 05:27, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
  • I updated the Rohrabacher–Farr amendment page and also added a section to Medical cannabis in the United States about Rohrabacher–Farr, mentioning that the most recent extension extension expires on September 30. As far as the timeline article though, let me explain the point I was trying to make above a little better. The Rohrabacher–Farr amendment was initially signed into law in 2014, was renewed once in 2015, twice more in 2016, and then twice in 2017. Either all these renewals should be noted in the timeline article, or none of them. So IMO it doesn't really make sense to mention only the 2017 renewal. And the timeline article already mentions that the Rohrabacher–Farr amendment "requires annual renewal", so I think that pretty much covers it as much as is needed for that particular article. Does this make sense?
Also, I saw that you created a page for Rohrabacher-Blumenauer amendment, but redirected it to the timeline article. I think the page should redirect to Rohrabacher–Farr amendment instead, since the Rohrabacher–Blumenauer amendment is just a renamed version of the Rohrabacher–Farr amendment. Do you have any disagreement if I change the redirect? --Jamesy0627144 (talk) 02:49, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

National Cannabis Summit

National Cannabis Summit has been marked for speedy deletion, if anyone feels inclined to dispute, or otherwise expand the article. ---Another Believer (Talk) 17:53, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

Terminology: Recreational vs adult use

There is an active discussion at a subpage: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cannabis/420 Collaboration#Recreational vs adult use. - Bri (talk) 02:10, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

Marijuana vending machine

We've really needed a photo of a Marijuana vending machine since 18 October 2013‎. If these things are in use, then someone should have taken a pic of one by now.

Anyone? Please?

I know what you are thinking: "Oh man, right. I meant to take a photo but I kept putting it of, then I forgot. Then I remembered, but, like, I didn't want to leave the sofa and I didn't have the energy. And then, like...did you ever notice...wait...what were we talking about?"

Anna Frodesiak (talk) 09:57, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Many citizens obtain their cannabis from one of these receptacles: Flowerpot but as they don't appear to have a slot for nickels and dimes, I suppose they don't fall into the category of machines ;-) Aspro (talk) 15:45, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
Many citizens obtain their cannabis from that bag on the coffee table, and leave nickel beside it because they think the bag is a huge, complicated machine....no wait, that's acid. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:34, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Okay, that was unnecessary stereotyping that sounded like an after school special ;) They don't have them in North Carolina, so I can't help. I would be very curious to see one myself. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 14:40, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
Hi Dennis Brown. It was true, though. Anyhow, I kinda shot myself in the foot there. I think I've annoyed anyone who might have provided a pic. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:34, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
Naw. Where do they have these machines at? Which US states allow them? That would be a good thing to know, to find someone to go take a picture. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 23:45, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
Hi Dennis. "...The first machine was unveiled on April 12, 2014 and will be placed at the Herbal Elements store in Avon, Colorado..." Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:07, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
I"m overdue to visit Colorado. They cancelled The Cannabis Cup there. I went to the first one they had with legal recreational cannabis in the state. Went to meet Ed Rosenthal and check out the scene, since I'm somewhat in that industry. Don't think I have a customer in Avon, however. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 00:18, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
Ah, Dennis Brown, then you should be able to email around and get a vending machine image. Check and mate, my friend! Ha! No takebacks! Here. I'll expect a photo by Thursday. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:26, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

"Did You Know" for Ed Forchion gets press coverage

best wikipedia "Did you know..." ever

-- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 00:15, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Recruit new editors for the project?

Hi, just wonder if there is any template or program in the project to recruit newcomers or new editors to join the project? Bobo.03 (talk) 18:00, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Notability of Dagga Magazine & reliable sources

Good day fellow cannafarians, I need help finding reliable sources to prove the notability of the publication. I have found a few but only one source is reliable. Please see the talk page.--MickeyDangerez (talk) 13:51, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

admin edits on daggafari

An administrator have made edits whereby she deleted parts for copyright violations but the info removed belongs in the public domain of South Africa.

The history cannot be viewed making it impossible to determine what parts was removed and believed to be in violation of copyright.

Please help restoring any content that has been deleted wrongfully. I feel that the matter should have first been discussed on the talk page or the part claimed to be infringing copyright shouldn't be removed from edit history, so that editors can review changes made.

Any help would be appreciated?

--MickeyDangerez (talk) 13:56, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

@MickeyDangerez: I suggest you be very careful about accusing other editors, especially experienced administrators like Diannaa, of vandalism because doing so could be seen as a personal attack. Vandalism has a specific meaning when its used on Wikipedia, and an administrator revision deleting edits they feel are a copyright violation are not vandalism. Administrators, like the rest of us, may make a mistake, but these are almost always made in good faith because the administrator felt a specific action needed to be taken for the benefit of the encyclopedia as a whole. So, if you feel a mistake is made, you can ask for clarification on the administrator's user talk page. Copyright violations are taken quite seriously by Wikipedia, and administrators have the ability to remove without any prior discussion if they feel it's necessary to do so. In addition, you start a discussion at Talk:Daggafari#edits by Diannaa asking Diannaa to clarify, but then a few minutes later you refer to her as a vandal on this talk page. Replies don't come instantly on Wikipedia since we are all, including admins, volunteers who occasionally get busy dealing with the real world. Sometimes you have to just wait and give someone a chance to respond before assuming the worst. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:06, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
The editor removed a quotation of a letter in the public domain. The revision delete should only be used where a gross copyright violation has been established or where defamation or other harmful edits may appear. I also strive on the good faith principles. A violation of copyright was never established. I only meant to portray that the edits are vandilistic in nature because it was removed in error without verification. I doubt that revision delete may be used in assumption. If my commentary appear personal or aggressive I am sorry and retract these hurtful accusations. Regards--MickeyDangerez (talk) 23:28, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
The edit was not vandalism. It was an experienced administrator doing what the community expects an experienced administrator to do. Administrators use revision deletion whenever they feel it is appropriate and necessary; if an error is made, it's almost always an error on the side of caution, not an error of competence, and can be undone as needed after the fact. As I posted above, there's nothing wrong with seeking clarification as you did on the article's talk page if you felt a mistake was made, The problem is that within a few minutes of asking for clarification, you post here calling Diannaa a vandal without even waiting to see how she responded. Diannaa is not some IP hopper who jumps from articles to articles causing mischief; she's an admin who has lots of experience dealing with copyright matters on Wikipedia. This doesn't mean she is never wrong, but it does mean that you don't label her a vandal in section headings on WikiProject talk pages. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:29, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
Maybe my use of the word vandal is incorrectly applied, what the gist of the complaint boils down to is abuse of power. The guidelines for the use of the revision delete feature is strict. None of the revisions made were in fact a violation of copyright as no such violation has been established prior to the removal and that is why I refer to these edits as vandalism because content was removed without first establishing whether there was a copyright violation to begin with. I didn't accuse the editor of masking their IPs or of being a habitual vandal. I am merely suggesting that the edits are vandalism in the sense that it removed critical content where no justifiable reason ever existed. There was no reasonable reason why the content had to be revision deleted, if the editor suspected that there may be a copyright issue a normal revision would at least create clarity as to what parts are being contested. Copyright cannot be established merely on the fact that content exists on mirror. The editor used a mirror (the Mybroadband article) as proof of copyright violation. While I believe this was done in error, and although the actions seem like vandalism I have no reason to believe that the editor had acted with vandal intent and never suggested this merely that the edits appear vadilistic. Please do not insinuate a personal attack where there is none.--MickeyDangerez (talk) 12:53, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
Please note that the edits has been restored and I consider this matter closed. Thank you for your contribution. Regards--MickeyDangerez (talk) 13:51, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
OK so Diannaa is not a vandal, but she abused her power as an administrator by revdeleting copyrighted content she believed needed to go in good faith? Again, even if an mistake was made, it was likely done per WP:COPYVIO and to err on the side of caution. Mistakes made in good faith are not abuse. If, however, you're so sure they are, then you can start a discussion at WP:ANI or you can make this claim on her user talk page and ask her to explain herself. This talk page is not really the place post such accusations. Anyway, Diannaa did restore some content, but there's still quite a bit revdeleted. There is also content you added to Dagga Magazine which was revdeleted by another administrator (Sphilbrick). That's two different administrators, both quite experienced, who felt there was a need to revdelete content you added to two different articles. Unless you're going to claim they are working together or are both incompetent, it does seem as if the revdeleted content might have been problematic and needed to be removed. -- Marchjuly (talk) 15:33, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

Moving List of cannabis organizations to List of cannabis rights organizations

Anyone who is interested, please chime in here: Talk:List of cannabis organizations#Title? -- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 02:56, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

This change may better dichotomize it with our List of anti-cannabis organizations (gosh - think I'll have to look that word up in the dictionary). A wikilink back to it, in the 'See also' section of List of anti-cannabis organizations may be useful as well. Don't see what the fuss is about. It is not like cannabis roams around like triffids. Down-boy-down, back off, keep your distance and don't you point your buds at me like that ! So I haven't any objection. Aspro (talk) 13:10, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
P.S Think 'Rights' is better than 'Pro'. As the latter suggest drugs are OK when the real problem is... Well, I don't think I have to complete the sentence because most here, probably understand the real issues. Aspro (talk) 13:28, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Cannabis in South Africa#David Carradine, dagga, racism and the Apartheid State

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Cannabis in South Africa#David Carradine, dagga, racism and the Apartheid State. -- Marchjuly (talk) 15:07, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Moving Cannabis refugees and Cannabis rights drafts to main space

It looks to me like Draft:Cannabis refugees might need some work, but it's mostly superficial (moving citations to replace "citation needed" tags, etc.) Another editor created the Cannabis refugees draft, but I think it belongs in the main space once some minor improvements have been made.

Draft:Cannabis rights was recently created by me. Can someone help me determine whether it's ready to be moved? Or, if not, what needs to be done in order to make it main-space ready? I don't have experience writing this type of article, but it seemed urgent to create, as I keep discovering more and more articles that red link to Cannabis rights. -- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 16:01, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

What is the rights page about? Look like just copy pasting. ...no real content there at all. So definitely not ready for main space.--Moxy (talk) 16:39, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
Thank you, Moxy. I think the list of rights could be expanded forever. But that can be done in the main space. Is Draft:Cannabis rights ready to be moved now? -- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 03:08, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Some content added to Draft:Cannabis rights and I think it is ready to be moved anytime. But reviewing the Draft:Cannabis refugees and now I wonder should the article be renamed Cannabis refugee? -- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 03:31, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Merging duplicate HEMP Party articles

Resolved

I don't know the steps to take in order to merge duplicate articles. Can someone help?

It appears that Help End Marijuana Prohibition (HEMP) Party and HEMP Legalise Marijuana are both about the same subject. -- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 16:25, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Solved. It was simpler than expected. -- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 04:05, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

Women and cannabis

Strangely, Category:Women in cannabis was moved to Category:People involved in cannabis. I don't understand categories, and I found the discussion afterward: Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2017 May 28#Category:People in cannabis.

There's already a category called Category:American cannabis activists, so the change makes no sense to me. Sources listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Cannabis support an article for Women and cannabis (or Women involved in cannabis, or Women of cannabis, whichever you prefer).

I think the original name of the category may have been imprecise. But the gender-neutral "involved in" nonsense of the new name for the women-specific category is rubbish. The Hammer of Thor (talk) 21:47, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

I think if there can be a category for Category:Female police officers, then there should be a category for Category:Women of cannabis. -- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 22:23, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
Or Category:Female cannabis activists. -- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 22:25, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
As an aside: I found this article, Women in the drug economy in the United States, that appears to need work. It might be a place to start. -- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 16:37, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
Can anyone help? I don't understand how to create categories, or I would make a new one for Category:Female cannabis activists. I will do it, if someone walks me through. But at any rate, I think this is the place to discuss appropriate names, before proceeding (since apparently Category:Women in cannabis was confusing, I don't want to repeat that mistake). -- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 15:27, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Am I the only one here who cares about the ladies? -- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 02:50, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

Moving Cannabis to Cannabis (plant), and moving Cannabis (drug) to Cannabis

Please add your thoughts to the discussion Talk:Cannabis (drug)#not a drug. -- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 22:00, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

I think you should also alert the other active Wikiprojects with those articles in their scope. Sizeofint (talk) 22:05, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
The merits of a move are being discussed at Talk:Cannabis (drug). A formal move request has not yet been made. That will be done soon. -- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 15:35, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
" will be done soon" why? there is zero support for a move. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.249.225.165 (talk) 23:00, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
I came in the middle of a discussion, and I offered a solution which had not been suggested before, because I agreed with the editor who initially made the comment. The problem is non-neutral POV of the page title for Cannabis (drug). Now I am uncertain whether swapping titles with the page for the plant genus Cannabis is the best solution. I think the titles for the articles, including Medical cannabis and Hemp as well, are confusing. All the articles, themselves, are excellent and well-written. The best solution might be to merge Cannabis (drug) into Medical cannabis because both articles are about the same subject. (Yes. I understand that the intention for Cannabis (drug) is to be an article about Non-medical drug use of cannabis. But marijuana can only be recommended by doctors, not prescribed, because it is an herbal supplement, and therefore there is not a distinction between medical use and non-medical use, as there is with pharmaceutical drugs that have been diverted to the black market.) Wikipedia articles must have a neutral worldview, and that includes jurisdictions where cannabis is legal for personal use. -- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 19:55, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
Your POV on this is very Americanized ( marijuana can only be recommended by doctors, not prescribed) and a herbalist definition rather then a scholarly definition. The problems are that most countries have various laws stating its a drug in its herbal form. Thus the vast majority of RS call it a drug. Must also remember Cannabis (drug) covers both rec and med usage with a normal title. "Non-medical drug use of cannabis" is not WP:RECOGNIZABLE as for not non-neutral (though I dont see a problem) pls see WP:POVNAME.--Moxy (talk) 21:54, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Mark Elworth Jr. nominated for deletion

Please join the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark Elworth Jr. I need help and support. -- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 19:37, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

The article was moved to Draft:Mark Elworth Jr. I would greatly appreciate any advice or suggestions about improvements or changes, if any, that should be done to make the article mainspace-ready. Thanks in advance. -- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 16:27, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

Submitting new topic page for discussion

Hi there, My name is Sunita and I'm part of the team at Aphria here in Canada. I was hoping to start up a page about Aphria on Wikipedia. I've pasted in an article below which I've fully sourced with references from other articles. Let me know what you think - I'm happy to work with you however you need!


Aphria Inc. (APH) is a Canadian licensed producer of medical marijuana based in Leamington, ON. Aphria, which grows product in greenhouses rather than in warehouses, is among the lowest-cost producers in Canada and the first to report positive cash flows[1]. As marijuana is currently legal in Canada for medical purposes only, growers such as Aphria Inc. are licensed by Health Canada under the Access to Cannabis for Medical Purposes Regulations[2]. Aphria sells high-quality marijuana through its online store and over the phone, as well as though wholesale channels.

Aphria is a publicly traded company on the Toronto Stock Exchange under the ticker symbol APH[3]. In January 2017, Aphria announced a $137-million capital project to increase its production capacity from 300,000 to one million greenhouse growing square feet[4].


Sunita-aphria (talk) 15:35, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Freeman, Sunny (July 13, 2017). "Aphria CEO calls on marijuana companies to disclose and improve their cash costs". The Financial Post. Retrieved 24 November 2017.
  2. ^ "Authorized Licensed Producers of Cannabis for Medical Purposes". Government of Canada. Government of Canada. Retrieved 24 November 2017.
  3. ^ Thompson, Chris (March 21, 2017). "Leamington marijuana company Aphria moving from Toronto Venture to Toronto Stock Exchange". Windsor Star. Retrieved 24 November 2017.
  4. ^ "Aphria Approves $137mm Expansion Project". New Cannabis Ventures. January 16, 2017. Retrieved 24 November 2017.

Marijuana vending machine

We still need a photo of a Marijuana vending machine. Please take one if you can and upload it here. Thanks. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 22:50, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Hashish is in huge need of improvement; one of WPC's top articles

I hadn't ever taken a close look at Hashish, but did so today and it's in dreadful shape, yet it gets 763,000 views per year. There appear to be two redundant history sections (both of which are broader cannabis-focused vice on actual hashish), odd things like citation-needed from 2007 and citations to Narcanon (the Scientologist organization). I'll do what I can to clean up the history section, provided nobody on the Talk there objects to merging the two and doing a big cleanup of it. If folks can glance at the non-history sections and see if they're equally bad, that'd help. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 06:30, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Cannabis/Redlinks

I've started listing requests for images/music/video we could use, which should come in handy for the 2018 Cannabis Editathon. Please feel free to add to the list. At some point I may better organize the redlinks page, add a Table of Contents and clearer introduction, etc. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 02:57, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

Cannabis in Canada tree

Should we add Canadian provincial-level articles like already have for U.S. states (i.e. Cannabis in Ontario, Cannabis in Quebec, etc)? Cannabis in British Columbia is the only one that currently exists. Federal legalization is set for July 2018, and the specifics (such as minimum age for purchase, private vs. public stores, home growing) will be left up to the provinces. –Surachit (talk) 05:15, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
@Surachit: By all means, please do! Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 05:31, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
@Surachit: Great idea! ---Another Believer (Talk) 05:50, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
What about Cannabis by province and territory till we have enough for separate articles.--Moxy (talk) 08:06, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
Seems like that would be a good idea even in addition to separate articles. The US has Legality of cannabis by U.S. jurisdiction in addition to articles for each state. Following the same format, the Canadian equivalent would be Legality of cannabis by Canadian jurisdiction, but since cannabis will be explicitly legal in all of Canada, maybe a better model would be something like List of alcohol laws of the United States. –Surachit (talk) 04:45, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
I like the idea of setting up drafts with all the formatting, that way when July comes we can more quickly get the articles up and live, and I concur that having a briefer overall page (with an all-Canada map maybe showing color-coding for different purchase ages, permissibility of home-grows, etc) of Cannabis laws of Canada by jurisdiction or whatnot. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 09:22, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
I've created a skeletal Template:Cannabis in Canada if anyone wants to start filling it out and applying it to pages. And I've placed that template on the draft Ontario and Quebec articles. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 09:26, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
The media just announced that First Nations in Canada have asked for the right to regulate cannabis independently on their reserves, so we may need to have Cannabis on Canadian Indian reserves as well, in parallel to Cannabis on American Indian reservations. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 08:10, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
I've started Cannabis in Nunavut; I'll do Cannabis on Canadian Indian reserves maybe next week, but I leave it up to others to fill out the template and produce the other articles. I submit that we should not wait for legalization to arrive in July, but rather should write with what information is available about planning, framework, etc. Cannabis in Canada and related articles are getting a ton of views due to this upcoming change, so without crystal-balling I think we should report on the scene as it evolves rather than hold off. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 07:49, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
I also posted at WPCanada inviting folks to help build the new articles: Wikipedia_talk:Canadian_Wikipedians'_notice_board#Collab_for_"Cannabis_by_province"_articles_for_Canada. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 08:17, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
And this evening I created Cannabis in New Brunswick and Cannabis on Canadian Indian reserves. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 05:53, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
We know have by-province/territory articles for all of Canada, one overview for (proposed) cannabis laws by area, and one for First Nations reserves. I'd welcome folks following the news to add updates as needed, and I'll be glancing at Pageviews to see if these new articles are gaining a following. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 06:40, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Proposing a full re-write of our History of Cannabis sections

Please see my suggestions here: Talk:Cannabis_(drug)#Proposing_full_re-write_of_History_section,_and_a_new_History_of_cannabis. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 09:20, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

I've got most of the article set up, a lot of it cobbled together from existing comment to bring all the History into one unified place for readers. I have one section that's still kinda challenging me, and I'd welcome any input there at Draft:History of cannabis:
  • Popularization and the War on Drugs
    • 1960s and increasing mainstreaming of cannabis use in West
    • 1970s and further pushback through international orgs, US pressure on India/Afghanistan/Bangladesh etc to restrict cannabis
Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 09:37, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
I'm very interested in non-European perspectives and put in an effort at sambe last year. Many of our articles seem to be about X as it impinges on Europeans, and I think on this one we can go beyond. The use of indigenous fibers and materials including hemp is still expressed in many east Asian and southeast Asian cultures. As far as I know, many, including Korea, have an uninterrupted history of cultivation going back to antiquity. The sambe article has some good sources for this, although several are books not online. Unfortunately, because Material Choices is excellent.
Will take a look at some resources here to see what can be done in the sections indicated. It may not happen until after New Years Day. ☆ Bri (talk) 16:40, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Proposed move at History of cannabis

A proposed move has been re-listed due to needing more comment for the admin to make a decision. If you have a preference, please add your comments at: Talk:History_of_cannabis#Requested_move_16_December_2017. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 06:09, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

 Done Move completed, now we have a comprehensive History of cannabis article. It's a little choppy, but should smooth out over time. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 23:13, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
Your effort on this is much appreciated. I'm still pondering how or whether to include the Israel stuff. Like you said, it should smooth out. ☆ Bri (talk) 23:45, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Brainstorms for 2018 420 Editathon

Just pitching a few ideas so I don't forget them:

  • We need to have an advance plan to engage readers on Reddit and Twitter at least several weeks in advance of the Editathon; depending on what I have going on I might just create accounts for each just for promoting WPC coverage in general, unless somebody else is already "building their brand" on cannabis issues in either of those venues.
  • We need a simpler landing page and message if we're trying to reach new editors. I had a brainstorm that in our promotional materials we can have some simple slogan like "Watch. Expand. Illustrate. Create." to explain the different ways people can contribute, starting with just watchlisting pages to prevent vandalism and guide development (and that gives them a toe-hold into the editor world), expanding current articles, adding photos or video (this may catch more folks' attention if we make that need clear, since a lot of people take tons of photos for Instagram and Twitter), and soft-pedaling the Create portion since that's the more challenging task for the truly motivated.
  • Some of these Editathons get banner ads, can we finagle one of those or is Wikimedia going to be leery of promoting the event?

Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 08:39, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

Thank you. Perfect approach.
I have been an occasional editor for the better part of a decade. But really only learning.
Last year, the edit-athon inspired me because the cannabis field of study carries the weight of a heavy negative stigma, and it helps to be surrounded by others who are like-minded.
2018 is an election year where I live, so I will be busy and distracted, but I hope to help with the project as much as I can.
-- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 01:39, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
  • National legalization in Canada will be rolling out a couple months after our editathon ends. A natural opportunity to recruit interested editors. I have a hunch that the legal age of 18 proposed in at least two provinces will be causing a commotion in the states south of the US-Canada border, none of whom have legalization for minors under 21. ☆ Bri (talk) 06:52, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
While creating new articles or improving existing ones is usually better done by experienced editors, there are a few areas where new-to-Wiki folks can be really useful:
  • Capturing Fair Use logos, sound clips, and movie clips to add media to articles
  • Translating pages between languages (a passion of mine)
  • Uploading personal photos of cannabis types, paraphernalia, or cannabis in different global locations.
I think too instead of posting a general invite on as many WikiProject pages as possible, we'd be better served to target the larger Projects, but offer them specific tasks/challenges to help.
Just more ideas. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 13:36, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

Recruit new editors to your project?

Happy new year! As you may remember, I've been building a tool to help WikiProjects identify and recruit new editors to join and contribute. See my previous post. I’ve been working it on in the past several months, and collaborated with some WikiProject organizers to make it better. We also wrote a Signpost article to introduce it to the entire Wikipedia community.

Right now, we are ready to make it available to more WikiProjects that need it. If you are interested in trying out our tool, feel free to sign up. Bobo.03 (talk) 19:20, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

I signed us up to try it out, seems like a pretty cool tool, and one I'd been hoping for for a while now. Basically it'll give us a chart that says "BobXYZ has edited 15 articles and created 1 article in your project this month" for anyone with a pattern of editing within WPC. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 23:12, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
Thanks, Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney. ---Another Believer (Talk) 23:13, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
Yes, Thank you, Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney! I am waiting for other participants to respond, and will send out recommendations together for the purpose of monitoring the activities of new editors, so we can improve our tool accordingly. Will keep you updated! Bobo.03 (talk) 16:34, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

To-do hopefully before California legalization on January 1

AUMA fully kicks in just a week from today. It would be good to have a drive to improve information for people seeking it here. Some suggestions above. Especially Cannabis in California which has redlinks in the lede and is embarrassingly tagged for a rewrite. Glossary of cannabis has been a one-person effort by The Hammer of Thor, heroic I think, and more hands are always better in such a thing; perhaps it is ready to be added to Cannabis sidebar?. ☆ Bri (talk) 06:00, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

I've done my tiny West Coast bit by adding mota to List of names for cannabis (another HoT-led endeavor). For my part, this week I'll attempt to find more data on early cannabis history (pre-1937) in California, since that's more my expertise rather than current politics. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 06:27, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
Very cool. I just got a good book, Substance Abuse in America (James Swartz, 2012 OCLC 320194116), and can drop a synopsis of the relevant chapter on history if you are able to provide a workpage? ☆ Bri (talk) 06:36, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

One note: on the first page of Google results includes Cannabis in California if one searches for "legal marijuana california" or "legal marijuana los angeles", so we are well positioned to have our efforts reflected to readers. ☆ Bri (talk) 06:45, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

@Bri:, if you want to just drop any cogent facts into my Sandbox, I can work them into the article: User:Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney/sandbox. Thanks! Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 07:16, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
Does anyone have access to a copy of Cannabis: Evolution and Ethnobotany? It appears to have several pages of early California hemp history. I'd also be very interested in any leads as to when the habit of smoking cannabis filtered from Mexico into California. Below are some useful pages of history reading. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 07:20, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
The ethnobotany book is in a university library about two miles from where I am right now but it will not be open until after New Year's. Have added OCLC lookup in case it is convenient for anyone else. ☆ Bri (talk) 14:38, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
Located usable text at Google Books, no need for a special trip to a library anymore ☆ Bri (talk) 21:09, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

I managed to get most of what I needed from the Ethnobotany book, though some interesting stuff is on hidden pages, but nothing earth-shattering. I think overall I've got the pre-1970s history decently well-covered for at least the basics. I'd love to have more content about use by Hispanics pre-1937 and how that filtered into other populations (though I was fascinated to find some argument that it was South Asian immigration that drove some initial restrictions). The part I'm vague on is finding cites for how the hippie and later beatnik cultures expanded cannabis in the white middle-class mainstream, which seems almost self-evident, but to avoid OR I'd welcome help finding some good citations about how cannabis use expanded in the 1960s in California, and particularly whatever arguments there are about California being (presumably) part of the vanguard for cannabis expansion. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 06:38, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

If you tell me the hidden pages I will scan and OCR as soon as the university library reopens.
As an aside about California we shouldn't rush to judgment about its being especially liberal on this topic compared to other Western states and provinces. Cali has a strong law-and-order/regulatory culture compared to other West Coast states; Adam Carolla spoke about this in an interview for The Cannabist, and it is in accord with what I have seen. The Alberta rules I've seen will, I think, be shocking to Californians esp. the 18 year age limit and allowing public smoking aling the same rules as tobacco smoking. ☆ Bri (talk) 19:18, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
Replying to self to add this: there is a fairly critical scholarly review of Cannabis: Ethnobotany and Evolution here, which we should heed in where to take caution with his research. My gut is that basic facts on plant biology are good but his conclusions wrt human evolution and the general timeline of domestication should be corroborated when possible. ☆ Bri (talk) 17:15, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
We did indeed get a spike in views coinciding with CA legalizing; for most of the year it's held around 500 views/day, but on the 27th it rose to 1,000 and kept going, then way up on 1 January to 3200/day: Permalink to Pageviews. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 18:33, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for the update. I tickled Talk:Cannabis in California so it would redraw the graph. ☆ Bri (talk) 22:49, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
3,937 for 2 January, let's see how long this trend plays out. Good call anticipating the heightened readership. That's almost double the view rate of the also-hot Cannabis in Canada, though I expect an enormous spike there in July. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 13:48, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Advertising thru Wikipedia

We as a project should keep an eye out for dubious articles that have crept in. I just noticed one for a law firm: Vicente Sederberg, LLC. See the article's talkpage for details; it may be rescued but needs cleanup badly. This is typical stuff. I can keep adding to this list because I've seen this sort of thing before at WP:COIN. ☆ Bri (talk) 17:33, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

Time to make Cole Memorandum its own page?

Today Sessions announced he's going to dismantle the uneasy weed truce between states and the feds. I suggest this would be a good time to break off Cole Memorandum (currently a redirect), bring it up to date, and prepare to update the article when the Memo is canceled. Anyone up (I'm more a geography guy)? Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 16:01, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I have been keeping some source notes I'd like to drop at a place. So I've created draft:Cole Memorandum and just threw them there. ☆ Bri (talk) 17:21, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
Sessions memo of today appears to specifically name the Cole Memorandum of 2013 as rescinded. You might catch a nice spike in views if you're able to get it up today. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 17:38, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
I've put a decent draft together, anybody want to proofread before it's moved to article space? ☆ Bri (talk) 18:25, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
Swept and tweaked. Let's publish it, and then add a new section for today's news (and check it was out on Pageviews tomorrow!) Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 19:20, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
 Done I used my page-mover superpowers and sent the draft up to Cole Memorandum ☆ Bri (talk) 20:35, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
Also nominated for In The News on ENWP front page.
As for building the article, I don't see anything at the DOJ website about this, oddly. We need to get some kind of official statement in there pronto. Oregon attorney Dave Kopilak's opinion here looks prophetic now. ☆ Bri (talk) 20:52, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
@Bri: HuffPo has a scan at the end of the article: link. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 21:14, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for creating this new article. ---Another Believer (Talk) 01:26, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

~45 countries remaining for "Cannabis in Foo" articles

Reviewing the list of redlinks, we have about 45 independent countries that don't have their own cannabis articles (plus some dependent/colonies/etc). I've taken a stab at a number on that list and found just not enough citeable material online to compose even a stub, so until GoogleBooks scans more stuff in, or more news articles are archived online or new issues arise, we can get most countries in the world their own article, but not all of them yet. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 09:36, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

I think Template:Cannabis by country is starting to get a little unruly, what do you think about organizing it by continent (like Template:Renewable energy by country or Template:Films by country? It seems like it would take a bit of time, but I can do it unless someone else volunteers. Surachit (talk) 19:41, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
No objections; I don't think it's necessary to divide it by continental-region, just by continent I think should be fine? If you get a chance, that'd be appreciated since I'm working on finishing up the by-country. Surachit is interested in doing Nicaragua/Haiti/DR and I think I can close out the rest of the Caribbean in the next week or so. But ultimately there will be ~35 countries in Africa, Europe, the Middle East, and Oceania, that I simply can't find enough information for on GoogleBooks or GoogleNews. Some of them might stay blank until more books are added to GB, or someone with access to more academic databases can pull more info up. If anyone is up for a challenge, I specifically suggest Libya, since I've been really surprised at how hard it is to find any data at all about cannabis there. If anyone wants to cover one that has a lot of data, I suggest tackling Democratic Republic of Congo (also search under it's older name, Zaire). Let me know if anyone wants to claim any of the remaining countries at Wikipedia:WikiProject Cannabis/Redlinks. Still, 150+ countries is pretty dang good for coverage, and well beyond the seven or so we had covered three years ago, so no use letting "perfect be the enemy of good". Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 06:46, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
Down to 29 remaining nations:
Amazing! Don't worry, if these articles aren't created beforehand, I'm sure we can knock them out during the next 420 campaign. ---Another Believer (Talk) 23:15, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
Most of these last ones are really tough; other than the DR and Nicaragua, I can dredge up just about nothing on the remaining ones. Not sure the 420 will catch these, they might just be a matter of waiting until more content pops up on gBooks or gNews. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 00:51, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

U.S. cannabis map – problems and possible solution

File:Test8493844.svg
Legality of cannabis in the United States
  Legal
  Legal for medical use
  Legal for medical use, limited THC content
  Prohibited for any use
  D  Decriminalized
Notes:
· Includes laws which have not yet gone into effect.
· Cannabis remains a Schedule I drug under federal law.
· Some cities and Indian Reservations have legalization policies separate from the states they are located in.
· Cannabis is illegal in all federal enclaves.
Map of US state cannabis laws
Cannabis laws in the United States1
  Jurisdiction with legalized cannabis.
  Jurisdiction with both medical and decriminalization laws.2
  Jurisdiction with legal psychoactive medical cannabis.
  Jurisdiction with legal non-psychoactive medical cannabis.
  Jurisdiction with decriminalized cannabis possession laws.
  Jurisdiction with cannabis prohibition.
1 Includes laws which have not yet gone into effect.
2 Marked states have only legal non-psychoactive medical cannabis.
* Cannabis remains a Schedule I substance under federal law.
* Some cities and Indian Reservations have legalization policies separate from their surrounding states.
* Cannabis is illegal in all federal enclaves.

I wasn't sure where to post this since the existing discussion about it is spread across a few different talk pages. But I'll try it here since it's an important topic that affects several major cannabis pages. Basically, I think the U.S. map that is embedded on these pages is very flawed and needs to be replaced. Several people have complained before that the map is too complex and the colors are too close together, making them hard to read. I agree with this assessment and believe the map in its current form does not bring much value to the average reader. I think it's especially important that it be fixed considering all the high-visibility pages it is embedded on – Legality of cannabis by U.S. jurisdiction, Cannabis in the United States, Decriminalization of non-medical cannabis in the United States, Removal of cannabis from Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act, Timeline of cannabis laws in the United States These pages combine for a total of about 4000 views / day.

So... I'd like to propose a solution. It's a map I created (shown to the right, with the current map below it), whittled down to 4 colors with the decriminalization states marked with a red "D". I actually uploaded a simpler version of the map to Medical cannabis in the United States a few weeks ago – the only difference being that the decriminalization states were not included. BTW, to add the decrim info I did the marking up in Microsoft Paint, so the file is saved as a .png instead of an .svg. Which I don't think is a big deal, but if this is something that is important I'm sure it can be done as an .svg somehow.

Anyways, I think this new map is much more simple and intuitive, and would bring a lot more value to the reader. One thing that is nice about it, for example, is that just a quick glance reveals very clearly the pattern of medical cannabis states. This is definitely not true for the current map. No info is lost from the current map either, with much clarity added.

Thoughts?--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 02:38, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

I'd like to see more opinions, but my initial take is positive. Minor nitpick that Louisiana has full-medical. Nice work! Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 09:37, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply Goonsquad. There is some disagreement about whether LA is a medical cannabis state, but most authorities on the matter do not consider it to be one. National Conference of State Legislatures has a statement on their website noting that they do not consider it a medical cannabis state, and the Drug Policy Alliance website has a map indicating the same thing. Also, when West Virginia legalized in April 2017, Marijuana Policy Project and Americans for Safe Access put out press releases stating that WV was the 29th state, therefore implying that LA is not one of the states. Additionally, almost every news story I come across says that there are 29 states, not 30. NORML on the other hand has published material indicating there are 30 states, but they seem to be an outlier on the matter. So I consider there to be 29, and LA therefore not one of them.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 16:39, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
I'd also suggest that "Jurisdictions with low-THC, high-CBD laws" be rephrased to something more explicitly medical to avoid confusion. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 15:14, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
I'm actually not up to speed on what this is. Is "allows CBD oil or low-THC cannabis" correct? ☆ Bri (talk) 16:20, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi Bri. When you say "low-THC cannabis", do you mean like cannabis in plant form that you can smoke / vape? If so, I would say that is not correct. I'm pretty sure none of these states allow plant form cannabis, even if it is low in THC. Basically, they allow the use of cannabis oil that does not exceed a certain concentration of THC. In many of these states, the limit is very low, such as 0.3%. In some states it is higher, such as 5% in Georgia. The purpose of limiting THC though is so that people can use cannabis products that are rich in CBD. I suppose they could just be called CBD states, but that would also be somewhat oversimplified because some of these states, such as Georgia, do allow more than a trace of THC. So THC is at least somewhat of an active ingredient.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 17:06, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
Wow this is tougher than I thought. I think the 0.3% limit to be considered not a controlled substance is FDA/DEA's limit for hemp oil or seed (actually based on Agricultural Act of 2014 definition of hemp [title VII, section 7605.b.2 if you actually care]). If it weren't for Georgia we could just say "allows hemp oil" "allows CBD oil" or "CBD extracts/oils"? Maybe a separate footnote for Georgia??? Or "up to 5% THC in Georgia". ☆ Bri (talk) 17:42, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
Georgia is not the only state that allows more than 0.3% though. According to NCSL, both Georgia and Virginia are at 5%, Alabama and Iowa are at 3%, three others are at 0.9%, and two are at 0.5%. So, that would be a lot of info we would have to add and doesn't seem worth it.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 18:22, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
I'm not exactly sure what you mean by "explicitly medical", but I notice the current map says "Jurisdiction with legal non-psychoactive medical cannabis", which I wouldn't have a problem with retaining.
BTW, I think some of the notes in the legend could be retained too. I'm sort of on the fence whether they are worth including, so I don't really feel strongly either way. Personally, I usually lean towards keeping things as simple as possible.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 17:34, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
The new map is better than the old map. --Frmorrison (talk) 14:11, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Generally liking it, especially the simple "D" for decriminalization to collapse many color states. General quibbles:
  • CBD issue -- see above. For simplicity I'm leaning to changing "Jurisdictions with low-THC, high-CBD laws" to "Jurisdictions with low THC limit".
  • "surrounding states" of Indian reservations (note caps): not all reservations are completely surrounded, in just one state, or reside completely inside the U.S. The Hopi Reservation is completely surrounded by another reservation. So the wording is not technically correct. For simplicity I'd change to "adjacent states".
  • Colors should be checked with a vision expert for accessibility. The green and gray may appear too similar to some people.
  • "Includes laws which have not yet gone into effect" - is this currently true? If so should we call these out by state abbreviation?
  • Nebraska: simultaneously prohibition and decriminalized seems self-contradictory. Is there another solution here?
Nothing I think must be changed. Perhaps worth consideration though. ☆ Bri (talk) 17:48, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
In regards to mentioning THC without CBD, I would be OK with that in some kind of modified form. Such as "Jurisdictions with low-THC medical cannabis laws".
In regards to laws which have not gone into effect, I really don't know if there are some laws that have not yet gone into effect, like some of the low-THC, high-CBD states for example. But I would guess they are all currently in effect in at least some form.
In regards to Nebraska being labelled as having cannabis prohibition and decriminalization at the same time, I do not think this is contradictory. Cannabis is still prohibited in Nebraska, even though the penalties are lessened (decriminalized).--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 20:41, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
In the legend, I think "jurisdictions with" is self-evident, so we can trim that and skip to the specifics. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 20:56, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
The more I think about it, the more I like it. How about this?
- Legal
- Legal for medical use
- Legal for medical use, limited THC content
- Prohibited for any use
- Decriminalized
I have updated the legend so everyone can see how it looks added in.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 22:05, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Hey everyone. I figured out how to do lines and text in SVG and am working on finishing the map right now. As far as the legend codes, I like the ones based off of Goonsquad's suggestion above and plan to go with that. In regards to the notes, I'm thinking keep all of them as they are for now, except to Bri's point I can change "separate from their surrounding states" to "separate from the states they are located in". There are a couple of other tweaks that can probably be made to improve the notes (or maybe one or two of them could be left out), but I'm not worried about it right now. If I have any changes to propose it will be on the Template talk page.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 18:25, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

So I got the SVG file done. It was actually pretty easy to do, and will be no problem to modify in the future as states change their policies. I updated the graphic on the right of this page with the SVG, and added the notes in as described in my previous post. I'll probably just go ahead and implement the change sometime tomorrow.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 00:10, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

I boldly linked the caption to Medical cannabis in the United States#Low-THC, high-CBD laws ☆ Bri (talk) 22:23, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
Good idea, thanks. I think everything turned out well.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 04:24, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

I think the "D" really helped simplify the color scheme, but with DC not having sales for three years now, and Vermont about to sign a bill legalizing with no sales, will we need to add a new symbol to indicate "no commercial sales"? New Hampshire probably isn't until next year since the current governor is opposed, but their current plans include no commercial as well. Map Correction: also Louisiana is mis-labeled, should be full-medical. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 00:53, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

I would say that a map is only supposed to convey pretty basic information, and the commercial distribution stuff is a level of detail that is not really necessary. It is somewhat of an important distinction of course, but you could also take it just slightly further and mark the (medical and non-medical) states that do not allow personal cultivation. I think whether use / possession is legal or not is the best cutoff point, and that it is still fully accurate to label the state as "legal" and leave it at that. Also, D.C. would be pretty hard to label on the map. You would probably have to do it as a note and I think there are already enough notes.
In regards to Louisiana, I addressed that replying to your earlier post.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 02:07, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Article needs more eyes

Coachella Valley Church has a semi edit war brewing, especially over whether in the lede it is a "church" or an illegal dispensary. I'd like to maintain some distance from this so as to not start appearing to WP:OWN anything. ☆ Bri (talk) 21:07, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

2018 U.S. state legislatures voting

Spring 2018 possibility, see Draft:List of 2018 United States cannabis reform proposals +MI, NH, NJ, RI, VT

Just putting this up for awareness -- New Hampshire Marijuana Legalization Commission (redlink, hint hint) has done some work, and the legislature is voting tomorrow [2][3]. Vermont legalization has already passed the state house of representatives and the state senate could approve this week [4]. New Jersey is probably soon; the new Dem. governor has basically said he'll sign anything the legislators put in front of him [5]. I'm having some trouble narrowing down the names of the bills so if anybody can help that would be great. NH might be HB 656 or HB 215 and Vermont might be S.22 – the names sometimes seem to be in flux as they go back and forth between chambers and legislative sessions turn over.
Anyway it's really cool when we get out in front of public interest, and I think we have an opportunity again here. I've created Draft:List of 2018 United States cannabis reform proposals for collaboration. We can also continue to update Timeline of cannabis laws in the United States § States?
Also: we could/should start preparing to update the US maps again. @Jamesy0627144: would you consider making versions of the map with various combinations of NH, NJ, and VT shown as legalized so we can slot them in as appropriate? ☆ Bri (talk) 00:26, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

I'm not sure what the purpose would be for creating various versions as it may exist in the future, but I can teach you how to edit in .svg if you want to make some maps. It's actually really easy and no special software is needed. Just download the .svg file and open in any text editor (Notepad, Wordpad, etc.). Find the state you want to edit (they are all labelled), then change the fill color from there or remove the line of code corresponding to the "D". To add a "D" it will take some trial-and-error to get the x,y coordinates right. After editing, click save and open in any web browser to view the image. Hope this helps.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 04:25, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
NH House just overrode their own commission committee and approved sending House Bill 656 to Ways and Means on a 207-139 vote [6][7][8]. Beware to researchers, some sources are overstating the action, e.g. Forbes "The New Hampshire House of Representatives voted to legalize marijuana on Tuesday" [9]. But that's really not true yet. Jamesy0627144 thanks for the map guidance, I'll work on having versions of the map offline. ☆ Bri (talk) 17:36, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
I was able to confirm that Vermont house passed H.511 [10]. It is calendared for the state senate tomorrow, and expected to pass [11]. ☆ Bri (talk) 21:42, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
Vermont's legislature just legalized via Vermont H.511 effective July 1, 2018. Pending governor's signature, which he said he will do. ☆ Bri (talk) 18:58, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
Signed, legalized in Vermont effective July 1. Question for the group: Do we wait for the effective date to update maps? ☆ Bri (talk) 20:57, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
The legend has a note that says "Includes laws which have not yet gone into effect". So I have already updated the map.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 21:05, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
Now, why didn't I notice that? Thanks for the fast update! ☆ Bri (talk) 21:08, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

What to do with redundancies at Legality of cannabis?

Kudos to Jamesy0627144 for their work at eliminating redundancies at Decriminalization of non-medical cannabis in the United States. That reminded me that for a while I've been concerned that Legality of cannabis is kind of a mess, so what do folks think we should do with it?

Similarly, Legality of cannabis has a hodge-podge of content better covered at individual country pages rather than mish-mashed into a melange of unrelated facts. Aside from that, there are issues with individual sections:

  • Alcohol and marijuana prohibition correlation is quite possibly POV/OR.
  • Attitudes regarding legalization is mostly survey data from Canada and the US, and also a number of rebuttals to concerns about cannabis in Colorado et al, that again might run afoul of POV.
  • Islamic view is largely uncited, and far better covered at the Islam section of Cannabis and religion.
  • Use of capital punishment against the cannabis trade is actually kind of interesting, but might make a decent standalone article if split off.
  • International reform is probably the single most-useful section of the whole article, though again the question of whether the same data could be moved to a different article, or used to make a new article.

You might notice that there are some 13 inter-language links in the margin, but all or almost all of those are actually equivalents of our very popular Legality of cannabis by country and honestly should probably link to that instead.

My gut is to just redirect this whole page to Legality of cannabis by country and farm out all its content to other articles, or in one or two cases a new standalone article. What do folks think? Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 21:11, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Has not medicinal use of cannabis always been legal when obtained by prescription in pill form? Does not the legality question of medical cannabis apply to smoking it? And is there in fact any medical purpose of smoking it? (PeacePeace (talk) 19:07, 2 February 2018 (UTC))
Has not medicinal use of cannabis always been legal when obtained by prescription in pill form?
no, that is why many states have recently legalized it. Because it was illegal to begin with.
Does not the legality question of medical cannabis apply to smoking it?
A few of the 29 states that have legalized medical cannabis do not allow smoking. Most allow smoking it.
And is there in fact any medical purpose of smoking it?
yes, it helps people who have trouble keeping down oral medication. It also allows for faster onset of action.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 21:17, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Well, I wouldn't really call it "cannabis" when it's in the form of a prescription pill. However, dronabinol was moved from schedule I to schedule II in 1986, making it legal to prescribe on the federal level.Plantdrew (talk) 21:55, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

@Goonsquad: Sorry about my off topic post. I don't really have a strong opinion one way or another, but anything to simplify and better organize I think is generally good. Too often that kind of editing is neglected.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 23:53, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Can I send invitations to new members for your project?

Hi, I have been working on recommending new members for your project for a while, and have sent some lists to Goonsquad_LCpl_Mulvaney who helped invite those recommended editors. I wonder if you mind me sending invitations directly to save time and efforts of yours? Thank you! Bobo.03 (talk) 05:18, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Bobo.03, no objections. Sorry, just been really busy here. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 13:33, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
@Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney: Got it. No worries! Bobo.03 (talk) 15:41, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Mapping decriminalization by city

Spring 2018 map, updated

I wonder if there is a way to show large cities that have decriminalized in states that have not? For instance, Atlanta, Detroit, Houston, Kansas City, Miami, Milwaukee, Philadelphia, Tampa, Wichita. Bolded cities over 1M pop would be high priority. To list all cities with pop greater than Wyoming's, add Detroit and Milwaukee. Thinking out loud, a circle-D might work for the four... ☆ Bri (talk) 07:26, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

For which map are you thinking? I wouldn't advise doing this on the main map of by-state cannabis laws as I think it's too granular. I could see doing it on a different map, though not sure if it's a pressing demand (though wouldn't hurt if someone wants to do it for enjoyment). Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 17:23, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
Included a mockup in this section... see lowercase D in circle for four cities >500,000 population ☆ Bri (talk) 19:39, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
To view it enlarged, you might have to click through to one of the scaled images until the image cache is purged ... this one seems to work now ☆ Bri (talk) 19:53, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
Have tweaked the legend, not the map. Recommend that discussion continue at template talk:Legality of cannabis by US state if interested. There was a related comment there that went unnoticed before. ☆ Bri (talk) 05:05, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
Bri, since you expressed on the other talk page you were looking for more discussion on this, I'll give you my thoughts. I think it's best to keep the map relatively simple and not try to cram in too much information by going into the legality of specific cities. It's a level of detail that I don't think is necessary; plus the significance of some of the city decrim laws is questionable give that state law is still enforced to varying degrees in these cities. Also, I'm not sure how much sense it makes to include a city of 1.1 million population but not 0.9 million population, or whatever the cut-off point might be. To me, the best cut-off point is just to not show any cities on the map. I think the map is in good shape right now just showing the much more important state-level info, and I'd hate to complicate it any further which was the whole problem with the map as it existed before it was overhauled.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 04:45, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
My random cut-off was 500,000, I think, for the image, and thanks for the feedback. I don't want to push this ... just brainstorms right now. From what I understand from certain people, Austin is also de-facto legalized but that would be OR to report here. ☆ Bri (talk) 15:22, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Has Cannabis been "legalized" in US?

Is there something I don't understand? If a state repeals its law against cannabis use, does that legalize it when it stands as a federal crime? Should legalization be used then in discussing this legislative activity? Or does it in fact legalize cannabis use & sale if the hemp variety is grown in a particular state, then harvested & sold only within that state? Or does the potential for export cause it to be illegal anyway under federal law? (PeacePeace (talk) 19:05, 2 February 2018 (UTC))

Is there something I don't understand? If a state repeals its law against cannabis use, does that legalize it when it stands as a federal crime?
Yes, cannabis is legal in 9 states. Numerous references can confirm.
Should legalization be used then in discussing this legislative activity?
Legalization is a good term that is widely used by many reputable sources.
Or does it in fact legalize cannabis use & sale if the hemp variety is grown in a particular state, then harvested & sold only within that state?
Cannabis cannot be transferred across state borders. Hemp can. Cannabis is illegal. Hemp is legal. The fact that hemp is legal does not make cannabis legal.
Or does the potential for export cause it to be illegal anyway under federal law?
Hemp is legal to possess under federal law. Numerous references can confirm.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 21:17, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Federal charges are still possible in states that have legalized cannabis use, as numerous references can confirm. Much of the western US is federally owned land, and federal law enforcement officers (e.g. US Forest Service Rangers) will issue charges for cannabis possession on federal land. Plantdrew (talk) 22:00, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Correct. Federal law applies across the U.S., regardless of whether on federal land.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 22:34, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Just want to chime in here that there's a real chimera of laws at the moment and not just federal/state. We also have internal inconsistencies e.g. between Department of the Treasury on accepting industry-related money at US banks (including Federally insured credit unions) and Department of Justice. And of course now US District Court district-by-district inconsistency encouraged by the rescission of the Cole Memorandum, effectively giving each US Attorney local autonomy. It remains to be seen how this will all shake out and is definitely an area for the project to cover. I suspect that the next big area of tension will be if/when there's a Federal movement to reschedule say to Schedule III, then how do various Federal agencies react to that? E.g. will rules on workplace testing change. It could be an even more muddled agency-by-agency patchwork. ☆ Bri (talk) 15:27, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Writing about cannabis

I started an essay Wikipedia:Writing about cannabis yesterday and invite contributions. What is there now really is just off-the-cuff thoughts in bulleted form. Eventually this could grow to something really robust like WP:Writing about women. ☆ Bri (talk) 21:19, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Cool man. Some good points there to start out with.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 23:24, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

De-scheduling proposed by Senate Majority Leader

I don't have time to follow up on this today but these reliable sources indicate that Mitch McConnell has proposed de-scheduling hemp today. ☆ Bri (talk) 18:40, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Draft needing help

There's a draft up for AFC review, but I don't know much about cannabis stocks. Anyone want to take a look and help get it ready for publication, and/or provide advice to the submitter? Draft:Marijuana Stocks Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 03:19, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

Sadly this looks like a WP:COATRACK or WP:POVFORK to push marijuanastocks.com and I don't see anything particularly worth salvaging for the existing Cannabis industry. If you don't know why I think this, check out WP:Identifying PR -- the draft hits a lot of points listed there. ☆ Bri (talk) 02:06, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

Went through Wikipedia:WikiProject Cannabis/Popular pages to address Unrated articles

I've only recently learned about "Popular pages" articles for each/most WikiProjects, so this evening I scanned as far as #150 on this Cannabis list and made sure that every single article had a Class and Importance rating. That can help identify valid stubs of a destubathon, and/or show articles that are in relatively basic shape despite being High or Top importance. I'm up a few hours more, so might see if I can ensure that all of WP:C's Top 500 are properly listed with classifications.

It's pretty fun looking at these top lists and pagecounts, I rather recommend it. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 03:52, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

Wow, what a huge help to the project. Thanks for your assessment work. ---Another Believer (Talk) 03:53, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
No worries, just finished knocking out all 500. The List won't update until the first few days of April, but thereafter we should see the change, and any that I missed. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 04:42, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
The chart dealie at the bottom of the main project page (which shows class/importance of everything in the project) had us listed with 181 unrated articles, so I've dug into that too, but I think I've fixed a large portion of them but won't be able to see correctly what's missing until the list next updates, since it doesn't live-update as I make changes. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 08:21, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
You can force a live update at any time here (I've just now run an update). Speaking of WikiProject reports and tools, I've added WikiProject Cannabis to CleanupWorklistBot's report. This report runs once a week, and just ran, so it'll be about a week before the report goes live at [12]; for now you can see reports for other WikiProjects at [13]. Cleanup worklist reports include articles with various maintenance banners and error categories (citation needed, dead external links, formatting errors in reference templatees, etc.). Plantdrew (talk) 16:35, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
Great information, and thanks Goonsquad for the work rating everything. Maybe once it populates, we should add CleanupWorklistBot's report to the April project tasks list for high visibility?
In case anybody's not sure where to look I'll summarize the top needs below. I've organized by my own sense of where we should focus, top to bottom. ☆ Bri (talk) 02:03, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
Top importance/Stub
Top importance/Start
High importance/Stub
Top importance/C-class

Okay, barring any minor slip-ups, I think I've rated every article in the project that was missing a rating (250 or so articles). So once the chart re-populates I'll see if I missed any onesi-twosies but we should be pretty much there. Next I'm going to go through some of the ratings and see if we're rating anything lower than it should be. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 00:51, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Not the popularity is the pure decider, but I went through Wikipedia:WikiProject Cannabis/Popular pages and singled out articles rated as "Low" but with high viewership to see if they were maybe underrated. I left alone articles that were mostly famous for something other than cannabis (like top-ranked Bob Marley) but I caught others like Reefer Madness being ranked "Low" despite being one of the most influential films in cannabis history. I also raised the importance on several articles about cannabis in geographic areas, where those areas have played a major role in cannabis policy and/or diffusion. So once everything updates it'll slightly change a few things, though mostly not drastically.
I would submit that getting Cannabis and Hashish up to at least a B should be a 420Collab priority, and honestly Hashish would be a good target to get another GA. That would probably require getting a few library books about hashish, since some of the major works are limited viewing on GoogleBooks. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 01:28, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
Whoops, missed the "force update" button recommended above. Did that, caught three I missed, so now all 1,948 articles in the project have a rating. I'm also updating Bri's list above based on the changes. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 01:33, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
Amazing! ---Another Believer (Talk) 01:59, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Template talk:Cannabis by country for China and Korea

Do you agree with me here re: China and Korea? ---Another Believer (Talk) 02:23, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Proposed merge

I've broached the topic here, but to be fair I thought I should post the proposal at the article itself. Thoughts? Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 06:50, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Utah legalization imminent

I just updated List of 2018 United States cannabis reform proposals with some surprise; the Utah legislature passed MMJ for some patients. Utah! Times really have changed. Procedural question: do we update the map after the governor signs the law? Bri.public (talk) 20:49, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

From what I understand the bills are pretty restrictive, but I would guess Utah would still be classified as a medical cannabis state, since use of whole-plant cannabis appears to be permitted. I'll be interested to see what orgs such as MPP and NCSL have to say.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 23:24, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
Note that our map includes states where a law has been passed even if it has not yet gone into effect. IIRC "signed by the governor" has been a common cutoff point where we call it good, but not prior to that signing (so not just when the law is passed yet awaiting signature). Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 22:44, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
Correct. Definitely need to wait for signature. After that, can come to a decision about whether to change map, taking into consideration how various organizations decide to classify Utah.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 20:57, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
Governor Herbert signed last night, I updated map this morning before I saw your comment. We can undo if it's not the right change. ☆ Bri (talk) 15:58, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

So... in regards to whether Utah should be classified as a medical cannabis state (on the map and elsewhere), at this point I'm thinking probably not. The NCSL page still shows there are only 29 medical cannabis states, and the person responsible for updating the page has confirmed to me in email that she does not consider Utah to have passed a comprehensive medical cannabis law. She also says that the Utah law restricts THC content, but I have read through HB 195 and disagree with that interpretation. I will respond back and see what she says -- but I would guess that she will still maintain that the law is not comprehensive, due to other restrictions that exist. As far as other authorities on the matter:

- NORML has not issued any statement. Their map still shows Utah as a CBD-only state.

- MPP has not issued any statement. An unrelated press release from March 23 says that there are only 29 medical cannabis states.

- ASA has not issued any statement.

- I don't know if they would really be considered an authority on the subject, but ProCon.org still shows only 29 medical cannabis states.

- None of the news articles I've seen have stated anything to the effect of "Utah becomes the 30th state to legalize medical cannabis".

Considering all of this, I think the map is probably going to need to be changed back. Perhaps there will be further clarification in the coming days.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 06:03, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

It looks like WebMD has updated their list with an asterisk, image. I'm having some difficulty finding the page that actually uses the image. ☆ Bri (talk) 02:19, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
That map hasn't been updated anytime recent, since it doesn't even reflect ND, AR, and FL legalizing medical in 2016 (or any of the states that legalized recreational that year). As far as the other sources mentioned above, still nothing has changed. I did reply to the NCSL person (on March 25) about whether the new law restricts THC content, but haven't heard back. Apparently she has made up her mind though, as the NCSL page was updated on March 28 and still shows Utah as not having passed a comprehensive law. I think it would be best for our map to match what what NCSL / NORML / MPP / ASA (and others) are all indicating... so I plan to change it back shortly.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 03:43, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
Related: the Utah Medical Cannabis Act initiative will be on the ballot in November. ☆ Bri (talk) 17:41, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

LDS and Judaism sub-drive

I'm really interested in Cannabis and Latter-Day Saints and Cannabis and Judaism. This could be a great area to bring up to date for 2018. If anybody wants to strategize a sub-drive for April, pls comment here or contact me individually. ☆ Bri (talk) 16:27, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

While they can be improved, a formal drive seems excessive, but just for collab purposes it's worth bringing up here. I think I mostly scraped what's available on gBooks for the Judaism article (except I didn't cover the "cannabis seder" trend because at the time it seemed too focused on one burst of media). For the LDS, did I miss some significant sources, or is it more that with Utah's law changing somewhat, the church has made more statements? Not trying to block any changes, just curious what I missed earlier on, or what new developments there have been. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 07:05, 30 March 2018 (UTC)
We could start with recent polling in Utah. Sixty-some percent of "very active" LDS adherents want to see full MMJ legalization there, and it goes up ... eighty percent for Catholics and over 95 for non-believers [14][15]. It isn't unusual for LDS membership to be ahead of leadership in changing social issues. And outside of that community, my gut tells me that this November's election will be a real signal to the rest of the nation when this strongly "R" state chooses to opt-in to the initiative. Is this grounds for massive expansion? Maybe not, but looking at cannabis in Utah, the current reality is not well represented. Frankly it's heavy on dry legal facts and light on any cultural relevance, i.e. what is driving the 2014–2018 changes documented there. And don't forget Utah is just part of LDS; we have to talk about the entire Mountain State region at least, not to mention, say American Samoa.
As for Judaism, we've got rather poor coverage of the topic in general for Western states, IMO. In fact one of this collab's members only a few days ago created Judaism in Oregon. Which is where a lot of the WP:C related activity, such as the seder you mentioned, is happening. I can dig up some more specifics and put together a more coherent proposal for activity.
Yes a formal drive might be over the top, but I might just go ahead and make some more mini-icons for tagging relevant articles in the outcomes list. ☆ Bri (talk) 15:47, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
Here's the first page of hits for the search "cannabis legalization Jews" (I use Bing):
  • As recreational cannabis arrives, California Jews are ready (J Weekly)
  • Will marijuana legalization light up Jewish advocacy... (Times of Israel)
  • Le'Or aims to put marijuana legalization on the Jewish ... (Jewish Telegraph Agency)
  • Marijuana and Jewish Joy: Do Jews like being happy? by Rabbi Gavriel Horan (aish.com)
  • The biblical roots of Jews and marijuana (Haaretz)
  • Judaism and the Legalization of Marijuana? (Algemeiner)
  • Medical Marijuana May Soon Get Kosher Stamp of Approval ... (Forward)
  • Is Marijuana Kosher? - Questions & Answers (chabad.org)
  • Jewish connection to the marijuana industry (Newsweek)
  • Rabbi Ties Jewish Faith to Medical Marijuana (ABC News)
Seems to me few of these have an existing topic where they could be covered adequately. Food for thought? And where do we put random stuff like the ownership of Weedmaps? Takoma Wellness Center? URJ's 2003 (!) resolution to legalize MMJ? Or Sheldon Adelson's bankrolling opposition to Florida Amendment 2 (2014)? Maybe my next task is dreaming up an outline for expansion of Cannabis and Judaism. ☆ Bri (talk) 02:39, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
By the way I just noticed that Jewish Virtual Library cites our C in Israel article [16]. ☆ Bri (talk) 03:57, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Kansas legislature passes hemp bill

Kansas Senate Bill 263, legalizing hemp research and production pilot under state D of A, cleared state house 123 to 1 and senate 36 to 3. Reconciliation next. [17] ☆ Bri (talk) 05:56, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Spike in views of Cannabis in Israel

I was checking Pageviews, and in the last couple weeks we've had a spike of over 500 views/day of Cannabis in Israel, surpassing even Cannabis in India. I checked the news to see what's up, and best I can tell the main story is that Israel has just recently approved exports of medical cannabis; that seems to be it. If other folks can keep an eye on their newsfeeds too, it still seems preliminary but might call for an update this week. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 23:23, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

Can do. By the way, the AP "LegalMarijuana" feed is very informative. ☆ Bri (talk) 03:00, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
Added a page view graph to the talk page to alert other editors to this extraordinary increase. Aspro (talk) 10:38, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
I think it's because of MMJ legalization. First sales – no kidding – on 4/20 [18][19] ☆ Bri (talk) 16:34, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

Rework of our two largest charts

In reference to:

Looking at the charts, both have: Possession, Sale, Transport, Cultivation

My thoughts are that these are not the most useful ways to break it down, since there's no column for Medical so we need to shoe-horn it into all four columns if medical is allowed. I would also think that "Transport" is kind of unnecessary since I'm not aware of anywhere where you can buy/sell/cultivate cannabis but can't transport it, nor the opposite.

I'm not wed to any particular settup yet, so solicit your opinion, but off the top of my head "Recreational, Medical, Sale" might make sense? And recreational can be entered (in the colored World chart) as yellow if recreational is decriminalized or de-facto legal but not officially legal.

Any suggestions? These charts rank #14 and #15 on our list of Popular Pages, with some 2,500 views/day. So these are worth improving if we can find an agreeable way. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 23:10, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

Pondering it further, we could do just three columns: Recreational, Medical, Cultivation.
For the US, if a jurisdiction (DC, VT) allows use but not sales, we can just caveat that in the "Recreational" column, and same for comments on Decrim in the US or global. Similarly places like Spain and Netherlands can have "Decriminalized, sales prohibited" in the Recreational column. I'm not aware of anywhere Medical is "decriminalized" but not legal (though a couple US jurisdictions sort of have a "legal alibi" thing for medical), and we can use the Medical column to caveat whether it's full-plant or just derivatives. Then for Cultivation, we can use the box to caveat whether they allow growing of hemp, or THC cannabis.
While I'm here, I'd also suggest that we go back to having colors in the US chart for visual clarity, same as Global. The old system was obsolete so I agree with removing that, but I think not having colors makes it harder to read at-a-glance. Thoughts? Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 07:36, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
Actually, I think it would be useful to have some outside editors weigh in on what they think would make the Global chart more readable, and we can apply whatever they think to the US chart to be more consistent. RfC posted here: Talk:Legality_of_cannabis_by_country#RfC_on_re-formatting_the_chart. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 07:44, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
I've made a mock-up at User:Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney/sandbox so we can see what it would look like (I'm partially through the start of the alphabet so far), so if we get a consensus for it we can just drop it in without disturbing the page for the large viewership. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 08:01, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
 Done Nobody's raised any objections to multiple proposals and an RfC, so I went ahead and changed the chart entirely. It should now be more readable and useful. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 06:47, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
It looks good, thanks ☆ Bri (talk) 18:07, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

Cannabis policy of the Barack Obama administration

I invite project members to help expand the newly created Cannabis policy of the Barack Obama administration article. Thanks! ---Another Believer (Talk) 00:53, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

Gardner-Warren bill

Something is in the air, perhaps to be introduced by Cory Gardner tomorrow that "'opts the state out of the marijuana provisions' in schedule 1", but without actually descheduling, whatever that means. [20][21] ☆ Bri (talk) 23:51, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Started Draft:Gardner-Warren cannabis legalization bill, in preparation for announcement this week or next. ☆ Bri (talk) 04:37, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Hemp farming legalized in four states in April

In updating List of 2018 United States cannabis reform proposals it again came as a surprise to me how quickly things are moving. Alaska, Kansas, New Mexico, and Oklahoma all have industrial hemp laws now. I wonder if this topic could have its own article? The following articles are accordingly out of date wrt hemp:

Cheers ☆ Bri (talk) 04:17, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

420 (cannabis culture) placed 10th on Wikipedia's "Top 25" this year

Like most years, the 420 article rises to the Top 25 for the week the 20th is in, this year reaching #10 with 766,055 views for the week.

See the Top 25 Report for the week of 15 April. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 07:03, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

Cannabis in the Northern Mariana Islands out of date

A tax-and-regulate bill is being voted on by CNMI Senate in a few hours (SB 20-62 final reading; it is Wednesday morning in Saipan). ☆ Bri (talk) 20:51, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

Started CNMI Cannabis Act of 2018, waiting for news of the CNMI Senate vote. ☆ Bri (talk) 02:47, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

Budtender

The Budtender appears to be a student project this semester, so extra eyes on the article would be helpful. Recent edits were done in good faith, but aren't ideal... ---Another Believer (Talk) 14:59, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Sources look good, except for one circular ref I just deleted. Some minor formatting to do. Pretty good for new contributors. ☆ Bri (talk) 22:24, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

WikiProject collaboration notice from the Portals WikiProject

The reason I am contacting you is because there are one or more portals that fall under this subject, and the Portals WikiProject is currently undertaking a major drive to automate portals that may affect them.

Portals are being redesigned.

The new design features are being applied to existing portals.

At present, we are gearing up for a maintenance pass of portals in which the introduction section will be upgraded to no longer need a subpage. In place of static copied and pasted excerpts will be self-updating excerpts displayed through selective transclusion, using the template {{Transclude lead excerpt}}.

The discussion about this can be found here.

Maintainers of specific portals are encouraged to sign up as project members here, noting the portals they maintain, so that those portals are skipped by the maintenance pass. Currently, we are interested in upgrading neglected and abandoned portals. There will be opportunity for maintained portals to opt-in later, or the portal maintainers can handle upgrading (the portals they maintain) personally at any time.

Background

On April 8th, 2018, an RfC ("Request for comment") proposal was made to eliminate all portals and the portal namespace. On April 17th, the Portals WikiProject was rebooted to handle the revitalization of the portal system. On May 12th, the RfC was closed with the result to keep portals, by a margin of about 2 to 1 in favor of keeping portals.

There's an article in the current edition of the Signpost interviewing project members about the RfC and the Portals WikiProject.

Since the reboot, the Portals WikiProject has been busy building tools and components to upgrade portals.

So far, 84 editors have joined.

If you would like to keep abreast of what is happening with portals, see the newsletter archive.

If you have any questions about what is happening with portals or the Portals WikiProject, please post them on the WikiProject's talk page.

Thank you.    — The Transhumanist   07:28, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

US legality changes in June

It looks like polling is in favor of the Oklahoma (!) MMJ initiative in June. Also, Commonwealth of Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) is having their house legislative committee action the last Tuesday in May, and could pass a bill anytime. ☆ Bri (talk) 03:55, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

Getting close to passage 1) CNMI full-scale legalization, Cannabis Act of 2018, on track for House passage 2) Illinois hemp bill, SB 2298, pending governor's signature. In limbo: Draft:Gardner-Warren cannabis legalization bill and Hemp Farming Act of 2018. The whole farm bill is hung up on immigration stuff. ☆ Bri (talk) 20:53, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
No longer in limbo, STATES Act sponsored by Senators Gardner and Warren. ☆ Bri (talk) 02:46, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

Texas Republicans

Texas Republicans adopted a decriminalization (rec.) / legalization (MMJ)/ rescheduling / pro industrial hemp statement in their platform [22][23][24]. This surely belongs somewhere, but where? ☆ Bri (talk) 19:00, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Cannabis in Texas? ---Another Believer (Talk) 00:05, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Louisiana medical cannabis – how to classify

So, there has been some discussion here in the past as to whether Louisiana is a medical cannabis state, for the purposes of color-coding the maps and stating in various articles how many MMJ states there are. I have pointed out that most reputable sources on the matter do not consider Louisiana to be an MMJ state, and hence that is what should be reflected on wikipedia (which there wasn't any disagreement with at the time). In particular I have pointed out that the National Conference of State Legislatures does not consider Louisiana to be an MMJ state, and I have used their page as a supporting reference in several articles (as they are a reputable organization with a great compilation of information on the subject). Well, sometime a month or so ago NCSL updated their page to now show Louisiana as being an MMJ state. NORML has also considered Louisiana to be an MMJ state for at least the past year going back to when I first checked. As far as other sources, Marijuana Policy Project still does not classify Louisiana as an MMJ state (see here they show the number as being only 29), while I have recently come across conflicting information on the Americans for Safe Access site. So considering all this I would like to propose that the map be updated to show Louisiana as having legalized medical, and the # of MMJ states in various articles be changed to 31 (now that Oklahoma has also legalized). Anyone object to this?--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 03:33, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

Country of Georgia just legalized

A high court decision upheld right to possess and consume cannabis as a constitutional "right to free personality" [25][26]. If I understand the reports, it was formerly decriminalized but the court said that even administrative fines are not admissible. ☆ Bri (talk) 17:46, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

New York

It's probably time to start something about the legalization process in the state of New York, now that the Governor has convened a multiagency panel considering legislation [27]. It looks like he wants the panel to craft a bill for the 2019-2020 Legislative Session convening January 9. I'd like to contribute but won't have time to do it all. ☆ Bri (talk) 17:40, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

Confirmed what I supposed above, the Governor described the panel as "a workgroup to draft legislation for a regulated adult-use marijuana program for the legislature to consider in the upcoming session" [28]. ☆ Bri (talk) 17:59, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
I called the NY Governor's press office for details (the name of the panel), and got sort of rebuffed. Maybe they will reply to my email inquiry? This might amplify the case for someone in the project having press credentials. I know at least one chapter issues them, and I think WikiNews used to. ☆ Bri (talk) 21:22, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

Possible change in Lebanon

Some blogs are saying that Lebanon is decriminalizing. Not seeing it in major Anglophone media yet, but worth watching for. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 01:35, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

Arabic or French would also be fine. ♫ RichardWeiss talk contribs 06:30, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
Does this piece from An-Nahar help? ☆ Bri (talk) 21:39, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

South Africa legalises 'dagga' aka cannabis.

Just announced in South African media and the BBC that the South Africa's highest Court has legalised cannabis by adults in private places. In a unanimous ruling, judges also legalised the growing of marijuana for private consumption. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-45559954 PetePassword (talk) 13:22, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

Do we need an article Cannabis light (low-THC cannabis but consumed in the same way as THC cannabis)?

Read an interesting piece about how "cannabis light" is all the rage in Italy this year, people buying low-THC cannabis marketed just as it would be in Seattle by strains and types and all, but apparently in theory you're not supposed to smoke it: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/long_reads/cannabis-light-italy-hemp-flowers-canapa-mundi-medical-marijuana-a8319471.html

I saw similar coverage of Switzerland as of late where you can buy high-CBD/low-THC hemp cigarettes, I believe also called "cannabis light" even in mainstream shops.

I know technically we cover the general topic across several other articles, but should we have Cannabis light to detail the specifics of this marketing trend, even though we cover the hemp plant and the CBD compound elsewhere? I think it could be useful for newsreaders who aren't clear on it, or find the idea intriguing and want to see how it's applied and where. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 07:23, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

I think we should stick to coverage in other articles, for now. ♫ RichardWeiss talk contribs 12:48, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

Our slim shot at creating Cannabis in Andorra?

GoogleBooks has just "snippet view" of "Butlletí oficial del Principat d'Andorra, Pages 1421-1986" of 1999. Can anyone here request it via interlibrary loan so we can create Cannabis in Andorra? Or anyone with JSTOR or whatnot who can find a couple datapoints for that country? I realize it's a tiny thing, just looking to chip away at countries for which we lack sourced articles. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 09:02, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

Stumbled across a local newspaper and finally found content to create Cannabis in Vanuatu. And a couple days ago knocked out Cannabis in Chad, Cannabis in Togo, and Cannabis in Burkina Faso. We're getting within spitting range of having cannabis articles for every single UN-recognized country (plus plenty of dependent territories, and all US and Canadian second-tier jurisdictions). Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 21:51, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

CBD approved for prescription use – plan to update map and template

A few months ago the FDA approved the CBD drug Epidiolex for prescription use in the U.S., and on Thursday the DEA assigned Epidiolex a Schedule V classification.[29] It's not available for prescription use quite yet but is expected to begin sales sometime in the next six weeks. As the availability of Epidiolex will make the low-THC medical cannabis laws in various states basically irrelevant, I'm thinking the map should be updated to remove the marking of these states. Most of these laws are largely ineffectual to begin with (as outlined by MPP here), and the wide availability of CBD products online is another reason why these laws currently barely matter. So I have thought for some time that it is perhaps pointless to include these laws on the map.... and now with the approval of Epidiolex I think that is even more so the case. Once it hits the market in the next few weeks, I'm thinking eliminate the olive color from the map and just make the CBD states gray (prohibited). Also, Template:Cannabis in the United States will need to updated to remove the "CBD oil only" category and make those states "Illegal". So... I intend to make both of these changes soon when sales begin, but wanted to give a heads up here first.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 21:45, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

@Jamesy0627144: I would submit that it's too early to rock the boat on this one. Until we get some RSs backing the argument that there is no longer a valid distinction, I think that would be reading too much into it. Also in many/most cases, wouldn't the CBD states in theory allow wider use of CBD than just one or two federally approved medications? And are the few non-CBD states going to allow Epidiolex even if it violates state law? Your suggestion is interesting but I'm not convinced yet that "we allow some CBD medications" has been totally obviated by federal action. If CBD were made completely legal federally, and no state prohibited federally-legal CBD medications, that would be different. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 23:33, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
Hey Goonsquad, good to see you back. I'll respond to a few of your points.
Until we get some RSs backing the argument that there is no longer a valid distinction, I think that would be reading too much into it.
- What is RSs?
Also in many/most cases, wouldn't the CBD states in theory allow wider use of CBD than just one or two federally approved medications?
- In theory these states allow the use of any low-THC cannabis oil for the treatment of mostly seizure disorders only. In reality there is no legal way to obtain these cannabis oils in most of these states, or it can be obtained through research trials only. The laws to a large extent are ineffectual as MPP outlines here.
And are the few non-CBD states going to allow Epidiolex even if it violates state law?
- I was under the assumption that rescheduling Epidiolex would make it legal for prescription use in all 50 states. I am trying to find confirmation of that somewhere, but I'm pretty sure this is the case. Can anyone else here confirm? I think perhaps that is a source of confusion causing us not to see eye-to-eye.
Goonsquad, is it OK if I move your reply and mine from the Template talk:Cannabis in the United States page to the post at WikiProject Cannabis. The post at Template Talk was intended to be more of a discussion pertaining only to the specifics of updating the template. And very few people are probably subscribed to the Template Talk page.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 01:48, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
Sure Jamesy0627144, feel free to move my comments, just leave a note here saying to send all further replies there for the record. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 05:37, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
OK, I moved it. BTW, I had some trouble understanding your original reply, so I think this conversation needs to be reset with some basic clarification. I believe that as a Schedule V drug Epidiolex is now legal for prescription use in all 50 states. Do you disagree with this?--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 13:48, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

So I did some more digging and found that Epidiolex is not yet legal for prescription use in all 50 states. Epilepsy Foundation has more info on that here.

As far as changing the map / template, I still think a case can be made for making the change now but I'm OK to wait until some later time as Goonsquad suggests.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 03:51, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

Reviving topic: should Template:Cannabis by country be sorted into continents for easier reading?

A previous editor had suggested that instead of listing 150+ nations in the Countries section, that it be divided by continent. That is actually what they do at fr:Modèle:Palette Cannabis par pays. Does such violate any "by country" template standards on English Wikipedia, if there even are any? Anyone strongly opposed or support? Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 22:01, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

Seems totally logical to me. Λυδαcιτγ 06:59, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

Stand by to update Lithuania legalizing MMJ (just needs president's signature following recent unanimous parliament approval)

Got another one just about in the bag, so let's aim to make sure we update promptly when he signs and expect a little iuptick n traffic: http://aaj.tv/2018/10/lithuania-parliament-votes-to-legalise-medicinal-cannabis-use/

Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 17:38, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

Legal history of cannabis in Canada, a project-rated high importance article, needs updating wrt the October 17, 2018 legalization. ☆ Bri (talk) 03:33, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

cannabis in Canada needs help to👀--Moxy (talk) 04:06, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Cannabis in Wisconsin

I am doing a research paper for school and I am following the legalization that is occurring in the State of Wisconsin. With Wisconsin's history of being one of the leading hemp growers in 1908 it is hard to believe we are just getting these privileges back. In 2017 Governor Walker started the change in 2014 when Lydia's Law was started. Though many feel that Walker is against the legalization of marijuana, he has taken baby steps in the right direction. With Lydia's Law this allows parents to provide cannabinoid oil for their children that have a medical reason such as seizures. In April of 2017, there was a Senate Bill 10 that reformed Lydia's Law allowing medical CBD Oil to be obtained more easily and prevent parents from being punished by law for possessing their children's medication. By the end of 2017, Wisconsin regained it's ability to farm hemp. This is allowing farmers to make more cash crops as they did in the past. There are several guidelines that are in place for farmers. Some of the guidelines are that the crop has to go through testing to ensure low levels of THC and the farmers have to apply for special licensing. These may be small steps to full legalization or even just medicinal legalization, but they are steps non the less.

Jwalenton (talk) 01:46, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

Stand by to update South Korea and Thailand

South Korea and Thailand have both been pushing through legislation, with a very likelihood of passing, to legalize limited medical cannabis.

Just today I've been seeing Twitter and some fringe news announcing "medical cannabis is now legal in South Korea" but I'm holding back for a moment until major news services agree and provide well-sourced details. Very possible it's true but smaller sources are scooping the story, or that they've jumped the gun slightly and it's almost there but not quite.

So keep an eye out for South Korea news in the next day or so, and Thailand news in the coming weeks! Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 02:25, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

End of hemp prohibition in United States; first CSA rescheduling

Hemp Farming Act of 2018 updated ... new farm bill includes McConnell's hemp legislation. Voting will likely happen by end of year according to political news sites (and The Stranger, of course [30]). This is AFAIK the first time any cannabis related substance will be rescheduled under the Controlled Substances Act. ☆ Bri (talk) 16:06, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

Should Cannabis in Mexico say "legalized" or nuance it more?

Following Mexico's Supreme Court declaring laws against adult use unconstitutional, folk changed the article to say "legal". Would y'all agree that's inaccurate?

The current situation seems very comparable to South Africa and we don't call that "legal" yet. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 02:47, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I did some work on it to make it more accurate.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 14:04, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

Keep an eye on Luxembourg (recreational) and Lithuania (medical) for upcoming changes

Two more countries on the cusp of change; I'm keeping an eye out, and asked WikiProject Lithuania to let us know if an update comes up in national media. We are living in interesting times. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 23:21, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

I wonder what happened to that medical cannabis bill in Lithuania. It was sent to the president for signature over 3 months ago, but I haven't been able to find any confirmation that it was ever signed. I would think some kind of decision would had to have been made by now either way.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 03:55, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

US Virgin Islands governor signs MMJ into law; cannabis blogs are covering it but I'm waiting for a mainstream news source

Let's wait for this to pop up in serious news and then update the needed articles! Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 06:52, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

This looks like a reliable source, local newspapers are a good source and reliable for where the cover. ♫ RichardWeiss talk contribs 10:23, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

WHO recommends rescheduling

Early reports from Tom Angell at Forbes and others indicate that WHO has recommended whole-plant cannabis/cannabis resin be removed from 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs Schedule IV & THC be removed from 1971 Convention on Psychotropic Substances entirely. The full report has not yet been officially released. ☆ Bri (talk) 21:17, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

Cory Booker

I posted this source at Talk:Cory Booker 2020 presidential campaign as well. ---Another Believer (Talk) 21:30, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

Stand by for Cyprus MMJ changes

Cyprus' Legislature has approved MMJ, so stand by for whatever stage we need to update Cyprus to full-plant MMJ.

https://macbdoil.co.uk/cyprus-legalises-medical-cannabis/

Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 02:53, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

Hemp in Kentucky GA review

Hemp in Kentucky has begun a GA review. Anyone interested in participating can see the reviewer's comments on the article's talkpage. ☆ Bri (talk) 17:04, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Passed review! ☆ Bri (talk) 19:35, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
Bri, Nice! ---Another Believer (Talk) 19:36, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Cannabis (2nd nomination)

FYI: Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Cannabis (2nd nomination). ---Another Believer (Talk) 17:27, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

The portal has been kept. ---Another Believer (Talk) 22:12, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

U.S. cannabis map

I'd like to propose a change to the U.S. cannabis map color scheme. It's a pretty minor change, but since the map gets thousands of views per day across several pages I figured it would be good to give a heads up here. The proposed map can be viewed here (and the current version here for comparison).--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 00:20, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

Surachit has proposed a version on another talk page that might be better. I think I would probably lean slightly towards that one over mine.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 02:53, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

Map updated. Looks better! --Jamesy0627144 (talk) 07:24, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

I like the new colors, but I have no color perception issues (I think 10% of the male population does). Has the graphic been tested for visibility to individuals with color perception disability? I think there are some online tools ... didn't this come up last time we did a map revision? Or was it a different project? ☆ Bri (talk) 14:57, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
On https://www.toptal.com/designers/colorfilter it looks OK, maybe a little bit low-contrast for tritanopia. ☆ Bri (talk) 15:08, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
That's a cool website Bri, thank you for sharing it. On the greyscale / achromatopsia test, it seems that the legal and medical states are pretty hard to disginguish. However, achromatopsia (total colorblindness) is also the most rare form of colorblindness, affecting only 1 in 30,000. So I don't know if that is something we should pay much attention to or not. Actually, what I am more concerned about in that regard is that when people make printouts on a black-and-white printer, the colors will be hard to tell apart.
The map that I originally proposed is better as far as telling the legal and medical states apart. I would maybe slightly lighten the shade of green though, to make the red D's a little more visible.
Just letting you know I saw the ping but won't have time to do more color testing, sorry ☆ Bri (talk) 19:04, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
I'm not really sure right now what should be done – stick with Surachit's colors or use a slightly modified version of the one I originally proposed. Bri, you didn't seem to think there was a problem at first glance but what do you think after taking a second look? Anyone else want to weigh in? BTW, this all may soon be moot because in the near future CBD will probably be legal in all 50 states and the map will be going back to 3 fill colors instead of 4.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 18:58, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
edit: I just tested the map on the toptal website, this time using Firefox instead of Chrome, and it is much easier to tell the legal and medical states apart (in greyscale). What I don't like though is that the medical states are darker than the legal states, which is somewhat counterintuitive (the more legal, the darker the states should be IMO). Also to consider is that Chrome is much more widely used than Firefox, so I would put more weight on the Chrome test than the Firefox. Anyways, this might be why I saw a problem in grayscale but Bri you did not see one at first glance.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 19:12, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

@Bri, no problem if you aren't able to give this further attention. I did do some playing around with the colors though and have come up with something that performs better on the grayscale test. I modified the current map to make the legal blue a bit darker and the medical green a bit lighter. This provides better contrast between the two colors (at least in Chrome, which is much more widely used), and also allows the decriminalization D's to be a little more visible. File has been uploaded here if anyone wants to take a look (and compare to current version here). I'll go ahead and make the change in the next few days if seems OK to everyone.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 04:39, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

New Mexico

Main page: Draft:New Mexico House Bill 356

NM might be on track for legalization in the next week. Legislation passed in the D-controlled House last night, and another R-cosponsored bill in the Senate is considered compatible, with a governor who has said they want to sign legislation. This is a good roundup of the current situation. Note that legislative session ends mid-March, so this will be old news by the time WP:420 officially kicks off. ☆ Bri (talk) 15:02, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

This appears to have been blocked this year by a single state senator as noted in the draft. ☆ Bri (talk) 04:16, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

420 Collaboration

The 420 Collaboration is underway. Come play! ---Another Believer (Talk) 00:21, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Heads-up, New Jersey legislation on the way

I just expanded New Jersey Cannabis Regulatory and Expungement Aid Modernization Act a little bit, but more could be done. According to Politico, the leadership of both upper and lower house, and the state governor, have "reached an agreement" and the bill is on its way [31]. The New York Times said "the biggest hurdle" for the bill has been cleared with the tax rate nailed down [32]. ☆ Bri (talk) 01:31, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Today The Philadelphia Inquirer (philly.com) reported that a deal has been struck and if I read the story correctly, 2019 legislation is all but inevitable. ☆ Bri (talk) 04:18, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
Voting on the floor of the state House and Senate is expected next week according to The Hill [33] and nj.com who puts the vote on the 25th [34] ☆ Bri (talk) 22:01, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
The Morning Call says that possessing/consuming cannabis in NJ may be legal "as soon as the bill is enacted" tomorrow [35]. ☆ Bri (talk) 02:05, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Wisconsin

New legalization bill to be introduced [36] ... maybe on 4/20? ☆ Bri (talk) 01:41, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

RfC: Should this epilepsy research be added to the Cannabidiol article?

Please weigh in if interested here. petrarchan47คุก 10:12, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

Categories

A while back when I was working on Medical cannabis in the United States and a few other pages I added a bunch of categories to those pages, such as Category:Cannabis in the United States, Category:Cannabis law in the United States, and Category:Cannabis law reform in the United States. Is it correct to say that any given page should belong to no more than one of those three categories, since Category:Cannabis law in the United States and Category:Cannabis law reform in the United States are both subcategories of Category:Cannabis in the United States? Just wanted to confirm my mistake.

I created Category:Cannabis in the United States by territory by the way to help clean up Category:Cannabis in the United States. I'm looking to maybe clean out a few more pages from Category:Cannabis in the United States and probably not mess around with categories much more than that.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 06:44, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

After looking over Category:Cannabis law in the United States and Category:Cannabis law reform in the United States some more I think these categories should probably should be merged. There's too much duplication between the two and everything that is in the "law reform" category either could go in the "law" category or belongs in some other category besides these two. Goonsquad or anyone else have an opinion on this?--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 01:52, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Humboldt Cannabis Magazine as source

This might be a source for two strains that haven't been written about yet...

Is there any opinion on the RS-quality of this? I might be using it for the list of strains or for Emerald Triangle ☆ Bri (talk) 04:35, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

North Dakota decriminalization

Cannabis in North Dakota needs updating. I left some notes on the talkpage. Meantime I uploaded a new US map for ND's new status. ☆ Bri (talk) 04:42, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

@Jamesy0627144: Thanks for fixing the SVG legal status map! ☆ Bri (talk) 04:40, 12 May 2019 (UTC)
No problem. I'm sort of becoming the resident SVG expert around here, hehe.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 14:07, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

New York

Marijuana Regulation and Taxation Act is on hiatus till next session probably (technically they are in recess and could pick it up anytime). They passed decrim just before adjournment today [37]. Which is weird because there's similar results w/o the revenue, but whatever. Somebody want to update the NY article as appropriate? ☆ Bri (talk) 00:58, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Btw if the reports are correct, the limit for possession in New York state, where it is decriminalized but "illegal", is now 2 ounces, or twice the rec limit in Washington state where it is "legalized". Go figure. ☆ Bri (talk) 04:49, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Hawaii

There will be a state Senate vote on decriminalization tomorrow. The bill already passed in the house. ☆ Bri (talk) 18:06, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Passed Senate vote 21 or 22-3 with amendment. Now back to the House conference committee for reconciliation. ☆ Bri (talk) 13:59, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
Conference committee meets this afternoon. Bri.public (talk) 19:38, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
Conference committee has reconciled the bill, I think this is scheduled for floor vote tomorrow. The Star-Advertiser (Honolulu's major paper) says its passage is "close" [38] ☆ Bri (talk) 00:02, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
It passed, if signed by Gov. Ige, will go into effect in January.[39] ☆ Bri (talk) 05:14, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Not signed but neither vetoed, so decriminalization will occur Jan 11, 2020. Gov. David Ige allows decriminalization for small quantities of pot Honolulu Star Advertiser June 24, 2019 ☆ Bri (talk) 14:08, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Illinois

Illinois Senate passed a legalization bill this week and the House is debating as I write this, prior to a vote today. ☆ Bri (talk) 17:53, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Passed in Illinois House of Reps. ☆ Bri (talk) 23:41, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
We're starting to get some confusion at Legality of cannabis over whether there are 10 or 11 legalized US states. Some other project members might want to have a look. As of now we have a mismatch with that article and Timeline of cannabis laws in the United States which say 11 states, versus the US and world map images and the article Legality of cannabis by U.S. jurisdiction, which say 10. ☆ Bri (talk) 04:29, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
Well the bill hasn't officially been signed into law, so I personally haven't updated anything yet (though several IP editors have and I saw you did make one update). Once it is signed into law in the next few days, I would say it depends on how the sentence is worded. If it says cannabis "is legal" in X states, then probably should only say 10 since cannabis will not be legal in the state until January 2020. However, if the article says cannabis "has been legalized" in X states, I think we can (and should) say 11. As an example, consider that any time any state legalizes medical or recreational through ballot measure or governor's signature, you will immediately see headlines such as "[insert state here] becomes the Xth state to legalize [recreational or medical]", even though the law often doesn't go into effect until sometime later. The act of the legislature passing the legislation and the governor signing it into law, or the act of voters approving the measure, is considered by these news organizations to be that state legalizing cannabis. And I think that is what most people think of as well when they think of how many states have legalized cannabis. So considering that, and also the fact that it would be good to have consistency between what the map shows and what the articles say, and also the fact that it will make intro sections a lot less messy to not have to say 10 states plus one that hasn't gone into effect yet, I would say use 11 but also make sure the article uses the phrase "has been legalized" instead of "is legal". In fact, as soon as the bill is signed into law I was planning on making that change of terminology in a few articles of the main U.S. cannabis articles.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 06:00, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
Thinking about this some more, the phrase "has been legalized" seems rather clunky and wouldn't sound so great in some of the articles I was thinking about inserting into. As an alternative, I think "is legalized" sounds better and would still allow the number 11 to be used instead of 10. It's kind of a silly word game to play and isn't a perfect solution, but I think it's the best way to deal with the situation at hand.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 19:24, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
@Jamesy0627144: thanks for your reply. I was having trouble around this myself, which explains this self-revert. Whichever way we go is fine with me, as long as there's consistency. So, if we use "is legalized" in text and include jurisdictions where laws have been passed but are not yet in effect, I suppose we update the maps accordingly? We had this discussion once before, and consensus seemed to be that the footnote "Includes laws which have not yet gone into effect" was OK. ☆ Bri (talk) 01:03, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
Yes, that has been the convention we have been using with the map, update it as soon as governor signs it or a ballot measure is approved. And there have definitely been cases where the law did not go into effect right away; though, I'm not sure there has been a case where a law didn't go into effect for this amount of time. But I don't see any reason to change the convention and I think the "Includes laws which have not yet gone into effect" note covers it fine.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 03:06, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
One other thing, a number of reliable sources are reporting this as "done" e.g. Bloomberg, "Illinois Becomes 11th State to Legalize Recreational Marijuana". ☆ Bri (talk) 01:17, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
The governor hasn't signed it yet but he said he's going to. If you want to make updates now you can but I'm just going to wait until it's official.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 03:06, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
Ironically, since we started talking about this, Pritzker has sent a tweet literally beginning with the words "We legalized..." ☆ Bri (talk) 19:19, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

According to Chicago media [40] the governor will sign on Tuesday, June 25 ☆ Bri (talk) 04:25, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement!

Hello,
Please note that Decriminalization of marijuana, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of Today's articles for improvement. The article was scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Community portal in the "Today's articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing!
Delivered by — MusikBot talk 00:05, 15 July 2019 (UTC) on behalf of the TAFI team

History of Cannabis Museum

History of Cannabis Museum has been nominated for deletion, but perhaps rightly so? ---Another Believer (Talk) 14:17, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

As it stands, yes rightly so. The single source hardly demonstrates notability. Robvanvee 14:21, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Does Someone Want to Rate This Article?

I think we covered the Hemp Industries Association v. Drug Enforcement Administration lawsuits pretty well. Does someone want to rate it? Zimm82 (talk) 01:13, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

Relevant requested move discussion

An editor has opened a Requested Move discussion at Talk:420 (disambiguation)#Requested move 6 September 2019 which would effect a Wikiproject page. Randy Kryn (talk) 01:03, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Mexico

There's a new suite of laws drafted for Mexico that would create the Instituto del Cannabis para la Pacificación y Reconciliación del Pueblo and codify what has been mandated by the Supreme Court; i.e. national legalization. This probably merits if not a standalone article at least a section at Cannabis in Mexico. ☆ Bri (talk) 23:35, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Request for information on WP1.0 web tool

Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.

We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Vandal blanking cards on this project

It's Special:Contributions/2604:2000:7041:1500:C1C:618B:9A64:2EE9, reported. Kingsif (talk) 18:01, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

Recent trims to cannabis lists

User:Drmies just made major trims to the following pages:

Are these trims appropriate, or should they be more discriminate? ---Another Believer (Talk) 18:02, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

@Favonian: I see you've reverted a few times, so clearly there's some disagreement here. Care to discuss? ---Another Believer (Talk) 18:02, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
User:Another Believer, I'm sure you saw my edit summaries, and I'm sure you looked at the source for that idiotic long list of names of non-notable strains, a source whose source is of course Leafly, which is a website that sells the stuff. Per convention, we list things that are notable, one way or another--typically notable in that they have Wikipedia articles, or that they are properly sourced. These are neither. You'll note I left the ones with articles; please also note that I removed a bunch of links to Leafly, since there are few things in this are that are less appropriate for sourcing. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 18:05, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
It's this person. Check out their ANI contributions for background on their good intentions. Favonian (talk) 18:07, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

See related proposed merge here: Talk:List_of_names_for_cannabis#Proposed_merge_of_List_of_names_for_cannabis_strains_into_List_of_names_for_cannabis. ---Another Believer (Talk) 19:24, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

New Page Created The Green Rush

Hi Everyone I've created a New Page The Green Rush The highlight the specific economic impacts following legalization. The page will cover history, key players, secondary and ancillary markets, stock market, economic growth, taxation, and other topics strictly related with wealth generation, or loss in the cannabis world. This term has been specifically used to describe this time, The Green Rush. You will notice it will be upgraded quite a bit over the next few weeks. Thanks, any thoughts or suggestions or anything else relevant is appreciated. Thanks! Jzesbaugh (talk) 20:44, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello @Jzesbaugh:, I've taken a look and done some initial formatting and cleanup. Overall it's an interesting start but I have a few points:
  • Is the "The" in the title necessary? I'm not totally sure what the best policy is so far as title conventions, but my gut is it should just be Green Rush.
  • It does appear to be somewhat of an industry term, but I'm not sure how to separate the topic from the overall topic of the legal cannabis economy in the US. My fundamental concern is that at the moment it feels like an article that's supposed to be about a specific term, but it's about the whole concept of legal cannabis sales in the US. Like to draw a parallel it's like an article is meant to be California Gold Rush but ends up being the entire history of gold mining in the US, if you follow.
Thoughts from others? Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 04:40, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
@Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney:I see what you are saying, and I'm not against it being something else, but there is a PBS special called "the green rush" amount many other. media sources so it's a media term, and is used frequently. The Green Rush is one of the largest global economic movements this generation is likely to see, akin to the gold rush or global railroads in scope. So the comprehensiveness is intended and is somewhat all encoumpasing in the economic sphere, where it might touch on mass incarceration, that is a larger separate article in itself. However the idea is to show how the green rush economic aspect touches all aspects of culture, again, the main motivators being economic. Where an article on legalization might focus more on public policy, this sorta glosses over it. Or effects of legalization of MJ on, again, Mass Incarceration would be a larger article, where in the green rush article it might just make mention that people were profiting while others were/are in jail.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/tag/the-green-rush. I think if you do a search on the term you will see how its wide spread use describes the economic totality of legalization, and the economic rush associated with it. I weighed the pros and cons or "the green rush" or "green rush". The reason for "The" is that the global economic event is likely to only happen once, it is and likely will be seen in a historical context as a definitive event, thus "The". An article for each state or country is tedious and unwarranted in my view. So the idea is looking to provide a base page for the total event itself as it happens. The some notes are intended to start to build other articles from on specific topics that "The green rush" has created. As I work on it you will start to see it look more and more like the gold rush article with a focus on economic controversies, and economic activity.
However there is an article called “the green rush is white” where the authority focuses on minority ::exclusion in the economic event. Im weighing including racial economic exclusion in the oppertunity.
Bottom line, the article is not nearly done, and intended to be long and comprehensive and a bridge to build more niche articles on subtopics of legalization. Things the article will not touch as much on is medical marijuana, or personal grows, as they are not really economic movements in nature. Some sections may need to be pulled and used for other things. The focus is neither political, or socially oriented. Hope that clarifies.
Jzesbaugh (talk) 04:58, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Standing by to update Cannabis in Malawi with legalized cultivation

Reports still seem initial and I'm not totally sure it's finalized, so let us watch for clearly final word: https://www.fool.com/investing/2020/03/02/malawi-legalizes-medical-marijuana.aspx.

Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 03:28, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Good to see you again Goonsquad; I was starting to wonder if you were ever going to come back! As for Malawi I think it is official. I looked into it a couple weeks ago after it happened and couldn't find anything to indicate that any further action is required such as a signature from the president or another chamber passing the bill. So I went ahead and updated the map after Legality of cannabis had already been updated by someone else.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 02:49, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Impact of the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic on the cannabis industry

Project members are invited to review and help expand Impact of the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic on the cannabis industry, which is currently at AfD. Thanks! ---Another Believer (Talk) 18:08, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

EG-018

Should EG-018 be tagged as part of this project? ---Another Believer (Talk) 03:40, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Map update

We will need Virginia noted as decriminalized soon if not immediately – bills have passed in state House and Senate.

New Mexico legalization in a few days is possible, too, but I wouldn't rush to change it until after bill's passage is certain.. ☆ Bri (talk) 16:13, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

NM bill appears dead now. That's probably all the changes for near future. ☆ Bri (talk) 15:21, 13 February 2020 (UTC)
You don't think it's better to just wait until the governor signs it? That makes the most sense to me and is the way I have always done it in the past.
In Virginia the House and Senate passed different bills BTW, so they still need to reconcile the differences before sending it to the governor.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 21:23, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
Noted, we can wait, I wasn't sure what happened before. I guess we changed the map after the law had been ratified by the governor (or, equivalently, they failed to veto it in time) but before it went into effect?
New item. South Dakota may pass a hemp bill soon, but the state is gray indicating "all forms of cannabis illegal" which is sort of contradictory. ☆ Bri (talk) 18:55, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
I'm not sure what the contradiction is since nothing has passed yet. If they do pass a law though I'm not even sure what should be done in that situation.. but that's a long discussion I won't get into unless you want me to.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 16:49, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

The deadline for the Virginia governor's action is midnight Saturday [41]. I don't know if he works on the weekend. ☆ Bri (talk) 02:09, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Cannabis etiquette

I've created Cannabis etiquette and invite project members to help expand. Thanks, ---Another Believer (Talk) 22:07, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Commons category

I've created a Commons category for WikiProject Cannabis:

---Another Believer (Talk) 01:35, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Good resource for finding cannabis news articles

Hey just a friendly tip for the day... there's a website called Media Awareness Project, or mapinc.org, that contains a searchable database of news articles regarding drug policy reform going back to the mid-90s. The website has come in handy for me several times when I had trouble finding something using google or bing. Articles that are more than 5 or 10 years old can sometimes be pretty hard to find (stuff disappears from the internet), although I have found that bing is slightly better for that purpose than google. Hope this helps someone in the future!

Also, a good resource for keeping up with more current cannabis news is Tom Angell's daily newsletter at Marijuana Moment. You can also follow him on twitter.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 18:27, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

Reviewing Draft:Maui Wowie

Hey y'all,

I just declined this draft because it had subpar sources. I'm not really sure what passes for notability on this thing, or where to start looking for sources...just thought I'd drop it off in the hands of people more in tune with the ganja than I am! Etzedek24 (I'll talk at ya) (Check my track record) 04:20, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

I had success this year with targeted requests to translate articles from English into other languages. Saying "hey guys, just chip in" got me bupkis, but going to r/Tanzania on Reddit and asking "Can anyone translate Cannabis in Tanzania into Swahili" worked for quite a few languages, despite my starting that with only 10 days left in the Collab and limited time to focus.

In 2021, either I and/or someone else can target specific country/language subs and make specific requests to translate from English to a relevant language, and I think we could get dozens of articles done that way! Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 00:22, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney, Thanks for sharing your methods and results. Great idea for next year! ---Another Believer (Talk) 00:24, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

In April 2020, 420 (cannabis culture) averaged 18,272 views per day

By the way, if you ever want to check the stats, I find the "Popular Pages" tool to make for fun reading Wikipedia:WikiProject_Cannabis/Popular_pages. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 04:03, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Don Young with a plant

Don Young supports cannabis legalization.

I upload a lot of photos of members of Congress and Senate and I got a kick out of this photo of Don Young with a plant. I just added it to his article. Thought y'all might like it, too! Also..just joined the project. I can't believe I didn't notice it existed until now. Thanks for all the work you do! Missvain (talk) 16:36, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

@Missvain: I like that pic! Can't recall a time I've ever seen a member of Congress holding up a cannabis plant before. It's especially unusual coming from a Republican who happens to be the oldest member of Congress. Times are definitely a changin'.
I wasn't even aware that you could use pictures off a politician's social media account BTW. It makes sense that you would be allowed to do that, but for some reason I thought it wasn't allowed unless permission was obtained. Maybe it is different for politicians as opposed to other people like celebrities.
Anyways... welcome to the WikiProject!--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 18:11, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

Johnny Boone

Prior to moving this to the mainspace, I would like a little feedback to make sure there isn't WP:OR or anything that may overeach BLP guidelines. I copies some information (but sourced it) from the Cornbread Mafia page but the rest was from other sources. The CM page can also be cleaned up once this goes live. Feedback is appreciated. --CNMall41 (talk) 22:37, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Feel free to edit the userspace how anyone sees fit. --CNMall41 (talk) 22:50, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Legalization or decriminalization

I have raised the question of terminology, legalization or decriminalization, at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Law. ☆ Bri (talk) 13:22, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Cannabis (drug) edits

Just wondering if any project members would be willing to give a third party opinion on the recent edits to the Cannabis (drug) page by User:Moxy and User:Rwood128. Those two users have removed some of the details about cannabis use in the United States from the lead section. They think the language they removed gave undue emphasis (for a lead section MOS:LEAD) to the US.

I could certainly see the need to remove some of the details that Rwood128 cut, especially the granular statistics about cannabis use in the US, but I disagree with the initial edit Moxy and others made. They removed a three word reference to the United States, again on the grounds that mentioning it gave undue emphasis to that country. It seems to me that it’s appropriate to include that detail since the US has the most (in absolute terms) cannabis users in the world.

But I’m by no means sure and would love if anyone would offer another opinion. Wallnot (talk) 21:50, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Re use, I find the stats confusing. Annual cannabis use by country doesn't put USA first but Adult lifetime cannabis use by country does.I have little faith in such figures anyhow, and suggest that it is best to leave the lede alone and deal with these confusing figures in the body of the article. Rwood128 (talk) 01:06, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
Why is it confusing that annual cannabis use by country and adult lifetime cannabis use by country are different numbers? Clearly more people have tried the drug than use it regularly, so I’m not sure what’s confusing about that. And regardless of how you feel about the stats, we’re just using numbers from RS here, not making independent judgments about how accurate data on a particular subject are. I’m fine leaving those stats out of the lead section, but the information about cannabis being the most prevalent psychotropic drug other than alcohol in the US (your current phrasing wrt the world is actually not supported by the source) should be restored. Wallnot (talk) 01:37, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Gelato

We all smoke Gelato but there is no article on Wikipedia about it. I started one: http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Draft:Gelato_(cannabis) IT NEEDS TO BE APPROVED SOON AND SHOULD BE GOOD ARTICLE IN NO TIME. Please give me tips. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LotteryGeek (talk • contribs) 01:46, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Interstate compact in the works

Bringing this up for two reasons. First, someone may want to take on United States interstate compact on cannabis. Second, I'm planning to add it under a new category we've never had before at List of 2020 United States cannabis reform proposals – interstate compact(s). ☆ Bri (talk) 23:54, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Cannabis culture

Cannabis culture was expanded recently. Additional eyes welcome. ---Another Believer (Talk) 00:35, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Anyone want to take a shot at recreating "Marijuana Justice Act"?

The article Marijuana Justice Act was recently deleted because it created by a banned user. I'd like to restore it to the way it previously existed, but an admin told me not to... although I'm not sure if that's an absolute order or not. @Bri: maybe you might be interested, since you've created a lot of similar articles before. If not I guess I'll take a shot at it. The article is linked to from a lot of other pages, so it would be good to have it restored in some form.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 20:01, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

I'll start a draft page and see what sources are available. ☆ Bri (talk) 00:53, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
Cool man. I just figured you might want to since you already created MORE Act, STATES Act, Marijuana Freedom and Opportunity Act, and others. No pressure or anything; if you decide not to I can probably come up with a few sentences. It looks the MORE Act might be the winner out of all those bills but I still think Marijuana Justice Act is worth having an article for, especially since I linked to it from a bunch of pages. It is also something that Kamala Harris has strongly supported, who I'm predicting is going to be our next VP.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 03:06, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Bri. I'm glad we got that issue taken of--Jamesy0627144 (talk)

Keeping an eye on NZ: results of cannabis referendum vote should be announced around 6 November in New Zealand

I was curious about the lack of news, but apparently it's a really close race and there's all kinds of counting and certification stuff, so media is saying not to expect any official announcement on the New Zealand cannabis referendum until 6 November. So let's keep an eye on that so we can promptly update (though probably someone other than us will hop on to fix it for the street cred, we may need to tidy it up).

Manage expectations, it's gonna be a real squeaker if it makes it at all. Progress is inevitable, but this may or may not be NZ's year to make said progress. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 08:37, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

By the way, Google search for "new-zealand legalization" returns this article as the top result. So accuracy is, as always, important. ☆ Bri (talk) 18:15, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Edits labeling research "partisan"

More eyes on New Jersey Cannabis Regulatory and Expungement Aid Modernization Act please, especially the footnotes mentioning Brach Eichler. ☆ Bri (talk) 18:03, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Timeline table

Hey what does everyone think of the table that was added to 3 of the main 6 cannabis in the U.S. articles by PDMagazineCoverUploading? I'm OK with it being in Legal history of cannabis in the United States, as I do think it can be a positive benefit to that article in some ways. It seems like it might be overkill to put it in two of the other main articles though. Especially in Timeline of cannabis laws in the United States where that material is already covered and it also doesn't belong in the lead section where tables never really go. Legality of cannabis by U.S. jurisdiction I'm a bit unsure about putting it there and I was wondering what some other people thought. Should the article consist of the main table only or is it fine to put a timeline table in there as well, one that already exists in at least one other main cannabis in the U.S. article? I appreciate the work that went into it BTW, it's just that it's kind of a big table and I think some further consideration is needed regarding where it should and should not go.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 05:41, 21 November 2020 (UTC

I apologize if my contribution was too aggressive and needed more input first. I thought it would be convienient to have a reference for when cannabis became legal throughout different jurisdictions, as previously you had to go to the articles and manually research the timeline yourself. It's also easier to update than, say, the gif on the Timeline page.

That said, I agree my implementation of it on the Timeline article was clumsy and won't contest the reversion. PDMagazineCoverUploading (talk) 19:35, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

It's all good PDMCU, sometimes it's good to just go ahead and add stuff and figure the rest out later. Regarding the timeline article, the table does bring some new information to the article in the form of legalization implementation dates, whereas currently the article lists only the date that the legislation passed (different from implementation date) and it doesn't get any more specific than the year it passed. So maybe there could still be a place for the table in the article, but I'm thinking it would look pretty awkward at the beginning or in the middle of the article; instead, maybe a section right before "See also" would be a good place for it. As for having the table in 3 of the 6 main cannabis in the U.S. articles, I guess that really isn't a big deal as I was worried about before, especially if the table is more toward the end of articles. So if you want to go ahead and add it back in as mentioned above I'd be OK with that.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 21:57, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

Appel du 18 joint

Hello, I just created an article for the Appel du 18 joint, a petition in France first signed in 1976 calling for cannabis legalization. It is a work in progress. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks! Thriley (talk) 19:18, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

S.D. status

A South Dakota court has found that the legalization initiative was unconstitutional. There may be an appeal South Dakota Supreme Court but I don't see it's been filed yet. The map may need to be changed to, I believe, legal medical use only. I'm posting this now to see if there's consensus to change it now, or should we wait a bit to see if an appeal materializes.

I think this is the second case where we have had ambiguous legal status, the other being New Jersey currently. "Disputed" or "uncertain" might merit a special color? ☆ Bri (talk) 10:37, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing this up. I would say that as of the now the initiative is invalid so articles such as Decriminalization of non-medical cannabis in the United States and Cannabis in the United States should be revised to remove the mention of SD legalizing and change the number of states that have legalized. An appeal will be filed from what I understand and if that ends up succeeding we can just change it back. Until that is all sorted out, we could also possibly add a footnote next to the number of states that have legalized in the lead section of those articles. Regarding the map, I would change SD to make it just a medical state for now.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 16:13, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Cannabis in New Jersey

I placed an update tag on Cannabis in New Jersey ... the article doesn't mention the 2020 or 2021 legislation at all. It seems likely that some legislation is going to be signed by the governor very soon. You can crib from the references at 2021 cannabis reform#State. Unfortunately I can not expand the NJ article at this time, myself. ☆ Bri (talk) 00:31, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Also, the US color coded map has been updated to show NJ in green although AFAIK as of today, none of the stuff mentioned above is law ... not even law with a future effective date. Although the referendum did pass to allow legalization, which is why I updated the map in November. It's a tricky situation. This should be discussed. ☆ Bri (talk) 01:59, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
Yeah it's a bit of a unique situation unlike how cannabis been legalized in other states. Personally I would just follow the example of NCSL, MPP, DPA, and ProCon in how they are all marking NJ as having legalized on their maps... but if you want to change NJ back to green for now that is OK with me too. Hopefully this will all be resolved in the very near future which I'm guessing it will be as this latest update seems to indicate.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 03:14, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
Green is fine with me, in alignment with the November 2020 legalization referendum. It's confusing enough to try to see what RSes say about the current status, right now it looks like the AG doesn't even know and has been telling authorities statewide not to bring cases although hundreds to thousands of arrests have been made since November according to NJ.com [43].
If and when the NJ article gets updated, I suggest more mainstream sources like these that I recently added on the 2021 reform legislation page. ☆ Bri (talk) 05:15, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Heads up, NJ Spotlight is reporting that S3454, scheduled for a vote tomorrow, is likely to pass and the governor will sign it and the prior legalization bills. [44] The Senate session is scheduled to start at 9:30 Eastern Time. ☆ Bri (talk) 16:56, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

NJ Senate and Assembly votes just finished, the cleanup bill S3454 passed 22-12 and identical bill A5342 passed 49-27. Governor signed into law shortly afterwards. ☆ Bri (talk) 16:44, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Cannabis/Archive_2&oldid=1137391155"