Talk:Spots (cannabis)

This article was nominated for deletion on 12 April 2008. The result of the discussion was keep.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pharmacology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pharmacology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PharmacologyWikipedia:WikiProject PharmacologyTemplate:WikiProject Pharmacologypharmacology articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Cannabis Low‑importance

	Cannabis portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cannabis, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cannabis on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CannabisWikipedia:WikiProject CannabisTemplate:WikiProject CannabisCannabis articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

removed the commando knife rip howto section, was inappropriate in spotting world wide and pretty howto generally, commando or spotless knife hits could certainly be worked into the article elsewhere though Dirtyfilthy (talk) 09:17, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"how-to" sections have been fixed, but we still need more pop culture refs. i've been told there was/is a prominent stencil-graffiti mural in queenstown that says something along the lines of "save power this winter, turn the knives off", a picture of this would be awesome ;) Ars666 (talk) 19:33, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Page needs BIG cleanup. If anyone can help with structuring the article ~~and removing the 'how-to' feel that it has currently~~ WITHOUT deleting content please feel free.

There is also more information that needs to be on here.

References are good. It helps keep those overzealous deletionist nazis at bay.

--

"A practice that should only done by master knife hitters, taking commando knife rips is a very dangerous method of smoking marijuana and should only be attempted after years taking knife rips in general." <--- HAHAHAHAHAHA

wtf happen to this page?

this article used to have much more information and now its been reduced to a stub again!

how come this page was only created in january 08? it has been around much longer than that - this smacks of revisionist bullshit

What is going on in Wikipedia land? My friends and I made a serious effort to create the defintive article on 'spots' and it has been replaced by a paragraph from some hack that does not deserve to be a footnote to the original article. The ability of 'experts' to substitute informative expositions on a particular subject for brief and vacuous coverage is a detriment to Wikipedia as a whole. I'm sure that those who read the original article would agree. Why was it changed/massacred? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vpkiwi (talk • contribs) 06:41, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I totaly agree. The old enrty was just right and even had a good photo. The current entry should go.

The previous article was nominated for deletion, and the final consensus was to merge it with Cannabis smoking#Knife Hits. Please view the discussion HERE. I will, once again, nominate it for deletion. If you have anything to contribute, please contribute it to Cannabis smoking. ~ Wakanda's Black Panther! (contribs) 07:05, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

the knife hits entry doesnt even exist anymore! spotting is a widespread methods for smoking cannabis. i see that joints and bongs have their own page, whats the deal here, huh? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.234.233.190 (talk) 04:56, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please read carefully wikipedia policies about adding new content: wikipedia:Attribution. Text without references may be deleted at any time. `'Míkka >t 15:43, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mikka please read WP:GAME

No *new* content was added. Some of the the bias and 'how-to' were removed. This is actually an improvement over the previous page. References will come as page develops, how is it supposed to improve if people like you keep deleting the little content this article has?! It seems as though people are all too happy to totally trash other people's articles based on spurious reasons. Heres an idea: How about instead of deleting 95% of the article (including references), you IMPROVE it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.234.233.190 (talk) 19:17, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The improvement of this article

Over in the cannabis smoking article we have Jaysweet trying to further his personal agenda 13:08, 18 April 2008 Jaysweet (Talk | contribs) (13,708 bytes) (added "Spots" subsection, so we can delete the article on it) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shreeness (talk • contribs)

That edit summary was probably less than ideal. However, you have to understand my intention: Someone had actually dug up a source or two for this article, and I do think the subject warrants coverage in Cannabis smoking even if I don't think it needs a whole separate article. I didn't want to lose track of the source in the event that the AfD closed with a Delete result. So what I really meant was, "added Spots subsection so that we can delete the article on it without losing the citations from the original article".

It's funny I am getting so much criticism from people for gutting this article, because the article is actually waaaay better now and might stand a chance of surviving the AfD. Sometimes when an article is just so bad, so full of unsourced crap and original research and how-to guides and such, that it is better to gut it and start again than to try and fix it.

There are still problems with the reliability of a few of the sources, but now the article has a serious tone, talks about the subject in a neutral manner, doesn't digress into unnecessary how-to information, and generally sounds like an encyclopedia article. That is great!

I'm still inclined to say Merge to Cannabis smoking, but I'm much more ambivalent now. The article as it stands now is helpful to Wikipedia. The previous version of the article, IMO, was harmful to Wikipedia because it made the project look dumb and undermined its credibility. That's why I felt so strongly about getting rid of it. Now? Meh. It's still a little wacky to have a whole separate article about a regional pot-smoking technique, but I don't mind it that much. --Jaysweet (talk) 12:48, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In retrospect I can see your point, and I apologise for my previous comments on the deletion page Dirtyfilthy (talk) 21:23, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And likewise, I apologize for kinda losing it on your Talk page. :) --Jaysweet (talk) 22:04, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

mmm tasty words.. yum yum! Ars666 (talk) 22:11, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, I was apologizing to Dirtyfilthy for what I said on his talk page. --Jaysweet (talk) 22:14, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Still skeptical

But I'll manage. I'm going to attempt to improve a few of these stoned articles (Lol, I'm so humorous.), now that they're here for good. Or for now. Whichever. I still strongly feel that this, as well as a few of the other Cannabis articles, should be merged into Cannabis smoking. But I won't add the template myself. Should another well-established editor come along that feels the same way, I welcome him or her to do so. And don't attempt to reply to me unless you can converse like a civil adult. ~ Wakanda's Black Panther!♠/♦ 00:58, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]