User talk:Tokerdesigner/Archived Discussions

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia from SqueakBox! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and becoming a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

Here is a list of useful links that I have compiled:

Again, welcome. Thanks, SqueakBox 20:46, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yo dude, you need to quit littering wikipedia pages by promoting your stupid "one-toke" utensils with all these obscure crater diameters and similar bullshit. Come on dude, get a life. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.58.22.160 (talk) 06:43, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

110629

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Kief_(yellow).jpg

hay man what should i us?

hay man im a bit of a recreational smoker and was wandering what i should use, other then a vape what would give me the best bang for my buck? --Talk Shugoːː 16:10, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dosisverminderung

Beim ganzen Artikel (Cannabis) ist zu bemerken, daß in der Abteilung, die um Konsummethoden handelt, keine Rede von Dosisreduzieren zu finden ist, lediglich heißbrennende "joint", "blunt", "bong" usw., wobei große Mengen auf höchster Temperatur verbrannt werden, was somit viel THC zerstört aber auch zu Gesundheitsschäden führt, die dann dem Cannabis unterschoben werden.

Dies wäre vielleicht so zu erklären, dass die geldschwere Tabakindustrie, besonders in USA, sich bestrebt, durch ihre bezahlte Politiker und Administratoren sämtliche Nichtüberdosisrauchmittel gesetzlich zu unterdrücken. Dabei verlieren an Wert allerlei Recherchen über angebliche Gefahren des Cannabis, denn tatsächlich nur "schweren Gebrauch" erforscht wird.--Tokerdesigner 17:59, 29. Sep. 2007 (CEST)

Studien über Vergleiche mit Tabak gelten nur bei Überdosis

Könnte man sämtliche Verbraucher erst bewegen, heissbrennende Überdosismittel (joint, bong) zu verlassen und zu 25-mg.-Portionen (in einer 6-mm.-Durchmesser Kleinpfeife wie Minitoke, Kiseru oder Midwakh) zu übergehen, wären alle Vergleiche zwischen den obenzitierten Riesenmengen von Cannabis und Tabak (eine gewöhnliche Zigarette enthält 700 mg.) irrelevant. Die Nikotinsucht treibt Tabaksklaven in den Überdosenselbstmord, doch weise Cannabisexperten wissen, das zu vermeiden und viele Geisteskraft aus wenigem Stoff zu bauen.Tokerdesigner 01:07, 3. Okt. 2007 (CEST)

(From talk page, Wikipedia German language section, "Cannabis" article)

Speedy deletion of Minitoke

A tag has been placed on Minitoke, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read our the guidelines on spam as well as the Wikipedia:Business' FAQ for more information.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Stephenb (Talk) 12:26, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Concerning minitoke

Unfortunately I have not been able to get access to the original entry which has been criticized, because it appears as a red (but unread) link in the above message.

Fortunately I can assure you that while the Minitoke message cited may be blatant advertising it promotes only parts here and there of the following battery of objects: company, product, group, service or person.

Product

Yes, a product is promoted, but not for delivery by any one particular company, group or person. The 25-mg. serving-size smoking utensil is a generic product made by anyone in their garage from parts or materials easy to find at yard sales in every neighborhood, including a 1/4(.25)" or 6 mm.-inner diameter socket wrench, a Mesh-40 wire screen pre-curved to sit 3/16 (.19)" or 5 mm. deep in the hex crater, and a length of extension tubing jammed into the square (driver) crater. (Further descriptions of smoking miniaturization products,handmade from these and other materials, at [[1]].)

Service

In over-all perspective the intended service is to introduce 45 million hot-burning-overdose cigaret smoking addicts (US) and possibly 1.2 billion worldwide to a non-overdose smoking alternative which can eliminate the 5.4-million yearly death toll (WHO, Feb. 2008)

Purpose of the utensil is to render the service of making a cheap non-overdose (25-mg.) smoking modality available to smokers now buying-- and lighting all at once-- the prevalent 700-mg. overdose nicotine tobacco cigarets, or hand-rolling a cigaret or "joint" with 500 mg. net weight of tobacco or herb inside, to be consumed in a series of up to ten puffs over up to ten minutes.

With the quarter-inch-diameter crater you control the dosage in a truly conservative way and avoid much smoking-related harm.

Vaporizers

The same dosage reduction service is achieved, perhaps better, by herbalvaporizers which do not burn the herb at all but only heat it up to 410° F. My own research into vaporizers reveals that the Volcano Vaporizer brand is endorsed for medical cannabis users by NORML Executive Director Allen F. St. Pierre (April 19, 2007). (The device can surely also be used for shredded tobacco taken out of a cigaret, properly screened pipe tobacco, or a tiny piece shaved off a cigar.) The Volcano is the highest-priced brand on the market at $600; there are numerous models in the $100-$300 range; there is a cigar-sized glass device for $24.99. I do not know if these cheaper models are trustworthy or worth the money. Here is a perspective from which to view the Volcano: I read an estimate that medical treatments for cigaret illness cost the US economy $50 Billion a year. To buy 45 million cigaret-addicted Americans each a Volcano for $600 is a one-time $27-billion cost (remember, in the 1998 Clinton-Gore settlement the tobacco companies pledged to pay government over $200 billion, which was to be used for stop-smoking assistance).

Minitoke-- not as good but cheaper

Until taxpayers offer up the means to provide vaporizers, the mini-toke remains an option. For about $7 one can buy a traditional kiseru or midwakh. For pennies and labor time, one can make minitokes.Tokerdesigner (talk) 01:59, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Minitoke

Use my Talk page if you want a response from me. Please do NOT change my user page. I nominated your article because it was written as if it was advertising a product. Please see our guidelines for how to write an article, which I referenced above. Stephenb (Talk) 14:22, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Blunts

While I do agree with you that using a vaporizer would be a more efficient and healthier way of consuming weed I disagree that it would be cost effective. the reason I can afford to smoke so much pot is because I prefer to buy larger quantities, I rarely by less than a half quarter and due to the fact that I am a resident of CANADA and a close friend of my dealer I am able to get lower prices than Americans, only the most chronic weed costs $30 for 3.5 grams, it usually costs $25. For this reason and the fact that my finances are such that I rarely have much money a vaporizer is not an option for me. Perhaps when I increase my capital it will become one but until that time I smoke blunts As to your reference to me tolerating the presence of nicotine in the blunt wrap there are a few reasons for it. despite the fact that I am a non-smoker of tobacco and am fully aware of the dangers of nicotine I tolerate it because 1 the amount of nicotine in a blunt wrap is relatively low due to its low bulk and I rarely consume more than half of a blunt wrap in one session 2 the flavored blunt wraps enhance the smoking experience 3 I have yet to discover amore simple and effective method of attaining a good hotbox. If I were to find a brand of blunt wraps whose papers were not made of tobacco I would be happy to purchase and use them but I haven't yet. The minitoke utensils you suggest would be suitable to new potheads and others whose tolerance is low, but as a majorpot head who has consumed 3.5 grams a week on average for the past year and has smoked much weed before that. My tolerance is high and a minitoke utensil would be ineffective in allowing me to reach my desired high Potheadpoet (talk) 16:36, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Original research

Hi there! I would invite you to read the Wikipedia policy on original research, which may help you understand why your recent proposed edits to Cannabis (drug) have not been accepted. Note that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and not a forum or message board, so that's why we insist that everything be verifiable. Thanks, and happy wiki-ing! --Jaysweet (talk) 22:35, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The case for minitoke (one-hitter) info

What you describe as original research is, I think, common knowledge-- among a minority of cannabis users, true. One must take into account the fact that a pro-overdose bias among smokers is maintained chiefly by a gigantic propaganda effort by tobacco companies-- $8 bil./year in US alone, I remember reading-- without which a majority of smokers might agree a narrow crater burns the herb less hot, permits eliminating sidestream smoke (SSS) and protects health. (Also Big Tobackgo controls politicians in the US, which in turn threatens any country which defies its anti-cannabis (anti-"paraphernalia") stance with economic sanctions.)

1. The narrower the crater, the less volume of suction (air movement) is needed to capture all smoke generated, permitting reduced burning temperature.--

I have not found publications verifying this, but I submit to you any researchers who openly challenged the hot-burning-overdose industry (Big Tobackgo) in this way might lose their accreditation etc. In other words, intimidation is the problem. If Wikipedia is going to "change the world" (or is that slogan only for fundgivers, not for editors?) there's no better way than to attack public health problem #1, 5.4 million deaths per year from cigarets (WHO Feb. 2008 estimate).

2. Eliminate side-stream smoke.--

Again, millions know this, but it's safe to say a huge majority of the 1.2 billion smokers worldwide never try a narrow crater utensil. Among other things, they're afraid to be caught possessing such a utensil because it has been stigmatized as illegal "cannabis paraphernalia". (Read up on Big Tobackgo contributions to U. S. politicians, especially Republicans, who pass "head shop laws" protecting the lucrative tobacco overdose "tradition").

3. Lower dosages protect health.--

Again, if researchers weren't intimidated, there would long since be concensus on this. True, a minitoke utensil is not as good as a vaporizer-- but can be hundreds of dollars cheaper. It appears most smokers wrongly believe they can't afford a vaporizer-- but a pack-a-day addict at US$2000/year might just consider a $600 Volcano. (The tobacco might even taste better too.) A one-hitter they can make in their garage for pennies. (I can agree that the minitoke information might best be placed after rather than before the vaporizer information.)

Consider that it has been known for decades that a cigaret (when sucked on) burns at 1500° F/860° C, and now we have a vaporizer that heats herb material to 365°F. The quarter-inch-diameter crater utensil falls somewhere in between; and what if the Wikipedia nudged researchers to dare taking on the job of finding out what the exact figure is?

Finally, no offense meant, but just why would you choose a username like "Jaysweet". A"jay" usually contains 500 mg. of herb (compared to 700 mg. for a tobacco cigaret and 25 mg. for a single serving in a properly designed toker). Would you be willing to comment on whether you have a romantic overdose-bias lurking in your psyche somewhere? A "jay" at several hundred degrees lower temperature might be as sweet? (Besides, can you afford to waste all that cannabinol?)Tokerdesigner (talk) 22:27, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Heh, first of all, Jay Sweet is my name, dude. Like, you know, my real name. That my parents gave me. And that has nothing to do with drugs whatsoever. Please don't knock it, kthx.

Second of all, yeah, I mean, I don't disagree with a lot of what you are saying, but it still is original research according to the Wikipedia definition. If 100% of the population of the world believes a certain thing, but there is no 3rd party reliable source (again, according the Wikipedia definition of "reliable source") that corroborates that, then it still counts as original research for the purposes of Wikipedia. The point is verifiability, and without a reliable source for your assertions, it is not verifiable -- no matter how true it may or may not be.

Anyway, I haven't reverted your changes; other people have. So there is no point in convincing me. I'm just trying to help you understand Wikipedia policies a little better, so you see why people will revert unverifiable assertions like that. (And again, when I use the words reliable source, original research, and verifiability in the previous sentences, I am referring specifically to the Wikipedia definitions, which I have linked to inline). --Jaysweet (talk) 14:00, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies

March 10-- Thanks for your response and apologies for any offense about the Username Jaysweet based as it is on your given name. My observation holds true to the extent that as presented on Wikipedia that username will suggest to some readers (especially on pages related to cannabis) an interest in 500-mg. hot burning overdose devices. The propaganda effect happens separately from any consideration of personal history, and the Big Tobackgo executives are rubbing their hands gleefully.

My own example: I was given the name Robert and I had an older brother named Dick. The leading comic strip in the newspapers (printed first on the Sunday color page) was Dick Tracy. What (whom) did Dick (detective) Tracy catch, sometimes beat or shoot, and deliver to jail? Robbers. Obviously there was some unconscious psychological thing which typecast me as the villain, the loser, atc. but at least I was luckier than Abel in the Genesis story. Anyway I changed to using my middle name and things have been better. No offense intended.Tokerdesigner (talk) 18:26, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, for what it's worth you are the only person I have ever heard of suggest that the very name "Jay" (being a quite common male name, at least in the US) as so directly conjuring an image of a joint, let alone having some sort of subtle "propaganda" effect in favor of "Big Tobackgo" (?!?). heh... I'm not really worried about it. --Jaysweet (talk) 18:33, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

More about Jay

It's not, apparently, suggestive of the image of a "joint" but refers to the initial letter "J". I have heard the word used over a period of years but, hey, that's original research.

The issue regarding the tobacco industry is that, to protect their profit margin, they must get any alternative to the hot burning overdose nicotine cigaret suppressed, such as slow burning miniature pipes. If cigaret smokers imitate some cannabis users the result will be they can get 28 single tokes out of one cigaret and the industry is stuck with selling a tiny fraction as much tobacco. So Big Tobackgo contributes to campaign funds to elect candidates, mostly Republicans, who will vote to keep low-dosage smoking equipment illegal on the grounds that it is "cannabis paraphernalia", leaving no choice but to smoke a "J" which is easier to hide or get rid of.

With 5.4 million deaths a year (WHO 2008), hot burning overdose cigaret smoking is No. 1 health crisis in the history of the planet and we are told Wikipedia is here to "Change the World", so maybe there will have to be a slight change in the parameters regarding authenticity of research?Tokerdesigner (talk) 20:00, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

March 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, talk pages are meant to be a record of a discussion; deleting or editing legitimate comments, as you did at Talk:Cannabis (drug), is considered bad practice, even if you meant well. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Jaysweet (talk) 16:57, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the misunderstanding. The 5 lines I deleted had earlier been written by me, but not signed ("Apology of a coward" for not signing, because I feared retribution from Big Tobackgo for comments I made about their hot-burning holocaust). I subsequently was advised by another editor that it is even safer to sign with a Username anyway. May be moot because I write from an anonymous big city computer with a crowd of 100 other geeks typing all around me. Oh, too, if you look up the paragraph you'll probably decide it's not that legitimate anyway. (Good luck with your new vaporizer.)Tokerdesigner (talk) 21:18, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

It was to be honest a legitimate target for deletion as only comments that are about improving the article itself should be on article talk pages, though leaving that to more experienced suers is also possible advice (where it isn't your own comment of course). Thanks, SqueakBox 21:26, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I figured out those five lines were from you, but you also fixed a bunch of other people's spelling mistakes as well.

Anyway, it turns out I am secretly an agent of "Big Tobackgo" and after this last post we were able to triangulate your position. Corrupt federal agents are on their way to your house right now to capture you and subject you to waterboarding until you confess where you learned our horrible secret. MUHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! --Jaysweet (talk) 21:30, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I confess to tidying up the spellings but that was because of my non-neutral point of view. You may note I only fixed the ones which were pro-cannabis and let the anti-cannabis ones go on looking stupid.TokerdesignerTokerdesigner (talk) 21:40, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

from "Smoking pipe" You may note I only fixed the ones which were pro-cannabis and let the anti-cannabis ones go on looking stupid.Tokerdesigner (talk) 21:40, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

from "Smoking pipe"

Related to the picture On the ends of the pipes, where you put your lips, what object did you use? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.47.38.3 (talk) 02:13, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Suggestions how the equipment shown can be made safer and more useful:

1. Long tube = low temperature at user end Find an airtight way to attach a 23-inch flexible drawtube to each device in the picture.

2. Suck-discipline Place a tight-fitting stiff plastic mouthpiece, about two inches long, about 1/2-inch into the flexible drawtube. This mouthpiece should have an airpassage of 1/8" or less, helping you learn to suck SLOWER through the drawtube and burn the herb in the crater at a lower temperature, getting more value and less carbon monoxide.

3. Critique of the picture (in article, Smoking pipe) Four pipes are shown, about 4" long and three of them having a very wide bowl, at least 5/8" i.d., the other too dark to see, maybe smaller. The problem is, if the bowl is too wide it makes it hard to burn small amounts of herb at a low temperature. The ones in the picture could harbor a hot-burning overdose serving of 300 mg. and more, whereas no serving greater than 25 mg. is necessary or advisable with any herb worth inhaling. Any larger diameter presents the paradox that if you suck hard enough to get all the smoke, you will burn hot enough to destroy much of the THC.

4. Big Bowl Baloney Please don't be fooled by the wide-bowl "tradition"! This is the result of a conspiracy over centuries to maximize customer purchases of tobacco by pushing overdose every possible way. Pandering to this "tradition" (by a Wikipedia article showing a picture of wide-bowl pipes and no alternative) amounts to overdose propaganda and serves only the interest of tobacco companies protecting their profit margin and trying to keep the hot-burning overdose 700-mg. cigaret "normal".

5. Midwakh A traditional pipe of Arabian origin with a diameter of 1/2" or less, providing for servings under 100 mg. Look for one with a quarter-inchdiameter. A long hookah-tube can be attached to cool smoke before inhalation.

6. Kiseru Even better, this Japanese product has a crater diameter of 3/8" or less, permitting 25-mg. servings, and is longer-stemmed (though stiff, less portable-- a variant featuring flexible extension tube is warranted. You might cram a small metal tube in the hole at the exit end of the pipe proper and slip the long flexible tube over this intermediary tube). Consider the paradox: over 50% of the male population of Japan (earlier 80%) smokes, yet they have the longest life expectancy on the planet.

7. Socket-wrench one-hitter You can make a proper utensil right in your garage out of a quarter-inch (6 mm) socketwrench with a screen wedged half-way in the hex end and a quarter-inch o.d. flexible extension tube jammed in the opposite end.

Wrap tape around to airtight the joint between the socket wrench and the extension tube. Tie 1-mm. colorshielded telephone wire (tokerwire) many times tightly around the tape, then form a 5-inch braid with a 2-inch safety pin at the outer end (screen maintenance utensil).

8. Hose-nipple A brass hose-nipple of appropriate inner diameter serves the same way. Your flexible extension tube fits over the barbed end.

9. Hard wood A hardwood bead can be used, with quarter-inch-diameter crater containing a screen that rests at a depth of 3/16". The wood will not burn because the small size prevents high burning temperatures.

10. Soft wood A softwood beadhead is permissible if a 3/16" length of quarter-inch i.d. brass tube is sunk in an appropriately drilled opening.

11. Traditional? Some of the above-described proposed standard smoking utensils, for all properly sifted herbs, are neither traditional nor nostalgic, but they do deliver 25-mg. low-burning-temperature tokes = more vitamin, less monoxide.

12. Perhaps the article could be titled Smoking pipe (cannabis and other herbs). Omit "crystals" and other dubious pharmaceuticals and provide information about dozens of natural smokable herbs available at health food stores-- basil, marjoram, oregano, sage (Salvia), savory, thyme, peppermint, spearmint, pennyroyal, hops, camomile, rosebud etc.-- and how to sift them to the even particle size (about 1/16") required for smooth low temperature burning, user nourishment and protection.

13. Single article? I think the reader is best served if a way can be found to combine all smoking under one monocular point of view. In any case, a big bowl delivers overdoses, burns too hot, destroys herb vitamin, and probabnly accounts for almost all pathology attributed variously to tobacco, cannabis, etc. The recent association of miniature smoking devices with dangerous chemicals such as methamphetamine is a result of the faulty social policy of demonizing cannabis for the benefit of tobacco marketers, and if cannabis were legalized the market for these substances might collapse overnight, leaving no vestage of excuse to condemn anti-overdose smoking utensils.

Alternative techniques -- dosage

Related to the picture

On the ends of the pipes, where you put your lips, what object did you use? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.47.38.3 (talk) 02:13, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Suggestions how the equipment shown can be made safer and more useful:

1. Long tube = low temperature at user end

Find an airtight way to attach a 20-inch flexible drawtube to each device in the picture.

2. Suck-discipline

Place a tight-fitting stiff plastic mouthpiece, about two inches long, about 1/2-inch into the flexible drawtube. This mouthpiece should have an air-passage of 1/8"/3 mm. or less, helping you learn to suck SLOW through the drawtube and burn the herb in the crater at a low temperature, getting more value and less carbon monoxide.

3. Critique of the picture (in article, Smoking pipe)

Four pipes are shown, about 4" long and three of them having a very wide bowl, at least 5/8" i.d., the other too dark to see, maybe smaller. The problem is, the wide bowl provides too great air access, making it hard to burn small amounts of herb at a low temperature. The ones in this picture could harbor a hot-burning overdose serving of 300 mg. and more, whereas no serving greater than 25 mg. is necessary or advisable with any herb worth inhaling. Any diameter larger than about 1/4"/6mm. presents the "Wide Pipe Dilemma" that if you suck hard enough to get all the smoke, you will burn the herb hot enough to destroy much THC.

4. Big Bowl Baloney

Don't be fooled by the wide-bowl "tradition"! This is the result of a hundred billion dollar conspiracy over centuries to maximize customer purchases of tobacco by pushing overdose every possible way (especially cowboy pictures). Pandering to this "tradition" (by a Wikipedia article showing a picture of wide-bowl pipes and no alternative) amounts to overdose propaganda and serves only the interest of tobacco companies protecting their profit margin and trying to keep the hot-burning overdose 700-mg. cigaret looked on as "normal" by the masses.

5. Midwakh

A traditional pipe of Arabian origin with a diameter of 1/2" or less, providing for servings under 100 mg. Look for one with a quarter-inch diameter crater in which a wire screen nests securely. A long hookah-tube can be attached to cool smoke before inhalation.

6. Kiseru

Even better, this Japanese product has a crater diameter of 3/8" or less, permitting 25-mg. servings, and is longer-stemmed (though stiff, less portable-- a variant featuring a flexible extension tube instead of the bamboo midpiece is warranted. You might cram a small metal tube in the hole at the exit end of the pipe headpiece and slip the long flexible tube over this intermediary tube). Consider the paradox: over 50% of the male population of Japan (after WWII it was 80%) smokes, yet they have the longest life expectancy on the planet-- even while using cigarets, they may puff less hard (lower burning temperature) or use an extension holder (Shinichi Suzuki 1898-1998 is shown with one, about ten cm. long).

7. Socket-wrench one-hitter

You can make a proper utensil right in your garage out of a quarter-inch (6 mm) socketwrench with a screen wedged half-way in the hex end and a quarter-inch o.d. x 20" flexible extension tube jammed in the opposite end.

Wrap tape around to airtight the joint between the socket wrench and the extension tube. Tie 1-mm. colorshielded telephone wire (tokerwire) many times tightly around over this tape, then use the 2 leads to form a 5-inch braid with a 2-inch safety pin at the outer end (screen maintenance utensil).

8. Hose-nipple

A brass hose-nipple of appropriate inner diameter serves the same way. Your flexible extension tube fits over the barbed end.

9. Hard wood

A hardwood bead can be used, with quarter-inch-diameter crater containing a screen that rests at a depth of 3/16". The wood will not burn because the small size prevents high burning temperatures.

10. Soft wood

A softwood beadhead is permissible if a 3/16" length of quarter-inch i.d. brass tube is sunk in an appropriately drilled opening.

11. Traditional?

Some of the above-described proposed standard smoking utensils, for all properly sifted herbs, are neither traditional nor nostalgic, but they do deliver 25-mg. low-burning-temperature tokes = more vitamin, less monoxide.

12. Perhaps the article could be titled Smoking pipe (cannabis and other herbs).

Omit "crystals" and other dubious pharmaceuticals and provide information about dozens of natural smokable herbs available at health food stores-- basil, marjoram, oregano, sage (Salvia), savory, thyme, peppermint, spearmint, pennyroyal, hops, camomile, rosebud etc.-- and how to sift them to the even particle size (about 1/16") required for smooth low temperature burning, user nourishment and protection.

13. Single article?

I think the reader is best served if a way can be found to combine all smoking under one monocular point of view. In any case, a big bowl delivers overdoses, burns too hot, destroys herb vitamin, and probabnly accounts for almost all pathology attributed variously to tobacco, cannabis, etc. The recent association of miniature smoking devices with dangerous chemicals such as methamphetamine is a result of the faulty social policy of demonizing cannabis for the benefit of tobacco marketers, and if cannabis were legalized the market for these substances might collapse overnight, leaving no vestage of excuse to condemn anti-overdose smoking utensils.

Alternative techniques -- dosage miniaturization

"Reduced Smoking May Lead to Unexpected Quitting"-- Dr. John Hughes, U. of Vermont School of Medicine, www.cancer.gov. (Dec. 2006)

(Unfortunately this idea has not appeared yet in the (Smoking cessation) article, so I wish to sketch it out here for the consideration of anyone who can help make it fit in.)

The 700-mg. format

Over the last century the tobacco companies have been allowed an absolute dictatorship over the choice of serving method for their drug, i.e. the sledgehammer overdose 700-mg. hotburning cigaret. While some 92% of tobacco worldwide is made into cigarets, some say nearly 99% of the advertising budget -- now nearly $10 bil./yr.USA alone-- is used to glamorize the cigaret format from whence cometh their profit margin.

With their monstrous tax "subsidy" to the government and campaign donations to politicians they have also induced lawmakers to act in their favor by banning alternative, i.e. "conservative" smoking methods, anything safer than a cigaret, on such pretexts as that the latter are "drug paraphernalia" usable for cannabis, etc.

(Perhaps everyone need not "quit" smoking! George Burns with his cigars made it to 100. Bertrand Russell with his pipe made it to 98. Users of those products often say, "We don't inhale." They receive moderate nicotine dosages through their mucus membranes and it gets to the brain sure enough.)

Miniature utensil

However, it may be possible to go on inhaling nicotine the rest of your life and still avoid the cigaret health damages. The trick is to devise a miniature utensil which serves 25-mg. tokes-- of which you can get 28 from the tobacco in one typical commercial cigaret.

The best way is to use a 1/4" i.d. socket wrench, into the hex end of which you press a 1/40-inch mesh wire screen about 3/16" of the way in, and into the other (square, or driver) end, a 1/4" o.d. flexible plastic tube, as long as possible to give the "smoke" i.e. hot gas plenty of distance to go, cooling down before it gets to your trachea. (Tape around the crack to seal air leak.)

Kiseru, Midwakh

If you want to look more "legitimate" and spend money, look at the Wikipedia article, Kiseru, where you can see an illustration of an elegant Japanese product (made in the Republic of Toke-yo). It has a small crater with a long straight tube, in fact it looks like something out of a 19th century illustration for "Huckleberry Finn". (You can add a tight fitting screen.) An Arabian counterpart is the Midwakh.

From 700 mg. to 25 mg. in one "cigaret break"

Now tear off a tiny bit from the cigaret ("This cigaret "break" will save your life!"), stuff it in the screened crater, light with a butane maxifer (don't call those things cigaret lighters), and suck as slow as possible, getting all the smoke and burning the weed at absolute minimum temperature. If one such toke doesn't replace an entire cigaret, have two! (The poor damn corporation is still getting only 1/14 as much of your money.)

Even yours looks better with an air bonnet on it

Then if you aren't ashamed (because it sure ain't dangerous), breathe in and out of a plastic or paper sack several times. You will get a maximum amount of nicotine and a minimum amount of carbon monoxide (the worst toxin).

Cognitive behavior therapy-- Cttttin' down

Now to borrow a page from Marks' Cognitive Behavior Therapy (see above), keep a simple diary in which you indicate every toke, such as described here, with a "t" and every hotburning overdose you backslud into with a capital "C". Today's entry might consist of a single line:

Wednesday, September 12: tttttCttttCttttttttt etc.

Such a "liberal" approach permits you to light a capital C overdose now and then when you are especially tense, or that certain person is looking, etc., but your aim is to eliminate them altogether! The Big C and little t's showing up in your diary will help remind you that you are Ctttttin' down!

Smoother

This method feeds you nicotine on demand any time you want it, but without getting the drastic sudden upsurge in bloodsugar ("pleasure") level followed by an equally drastic drop within the hour leading to the next overdose, which is the secret sacred (cigaret) dynamic that keeps the "habit" going. This smooths out your mood swings, mitigates "glucose bipolarity".

Screen maintenance utensil etc.

It remains to mention that you might want to wire a large safety pin onto your utensil to use for clearing the screen periodically, and have Q-tips, pipe cleaners and a little bottle of rubbing alcohol handy for occasional further cleaning.

Alternative herb choices

The shredded tobacco in any cigaret is ready to use in this manner. For cigar tobacco, coarse pipe tobacco, cannabis and other herbs-- consider trying basil, marjoram, oregano, rosemary, sage, savory, thyme, peppermint, spearmint, pennyroyal, hops flowers, camomile flowers, rosebud and many others available at any health food store--always use a 1/16" wire screen strainer to grind your herb down to a fine, consistent particle size so that it will burn smoothly and reliably when you suck slowly through the long extension tube.

Thanking every editor for your patience and hoping you will contribute to promoting this approach which might have a chance to save 5.3 million lives a year (WHO estimate 2003), else what's a 'pedia for. Tokerdesigner 19:20, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Blunts

The following was entered on the "Philadelphia blunt ban" talk page:

Article fails to mention role of "blunts" in promoting nicotine addition among youngsters

The synergy of cannabinol and nicotine is such that users mixing them risk quickly getting addicted to nicotine and becoming part of the at-risk population of smokers (WHO 2003 estimate: 5.3 million deaths per year attributed to cigarette smoking). Many young persons don't know that the wrapper leaf from a cigar, used to wrap a cigarette-sized dosage of cannabis, contains nicotine.

It has been alleged that since the early 90's tobacco-marketing companies or organizations fed funding, promotion opportunities or other rewards to rap singers who included references to "blunts" in song lyrics. The presence of artists with names like "Tu-Pac" or "Cool" speaks for itself.

Big Tobackgo

The classification of cannabis as a "drug" and consequent classificiation of equipment used to consume cannabis as "drug paraphernalia" serves the interest of the predatory tobacco marketing industry because

a. cannabis is an alternative substance which can be smoked instead of tobacco, threatening the industry profit margin;

b. lacking a substance such as nicotine which promotes habitual heavy overdosing, cannabis permits its users to get by with very small servings (as little as 25 mg. in a minitoke utensil, which anyone can make inexpensively). By branding such a utensil "drug paraphernalia", tobacco interests (through their tax-supported aiders and abettors in government) can achieve a situation of "compulsory overdose" where anyone who wants to possess and use an anti-overdose utensil, even only for purpose of tobacco use, risks social and legal sanctions based on the accusation of illegal cannabis use. This makes it easier to maneuver the large majority of tobacco users into the hot-burning-overdose category of many 700-mg. cigarettes every day.

Big Pharma

a. Banning cannabis protects the industry profits represented by many lucrative drugs for which cannabis might allegedy substitute at far lower cost.

b. If cannabis legalization resulted in popularizing an anti-overdose utensil among present-day cigarette-smokers, the resulting possible drastic reduction in illnesses now caused by the hot-burning-overdose tobacco smoking method (cigarettes) could produce a similar drastic reduction in the sale of drugs and treatments for patients suffering from cigarette-related diseases.Tokerdesigner (talk) 20:59, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Philadelphia_blunt_ban"

Legitimate Product?

If a product was legitimate then would it necessarily be "paraphenalia"? Also, the tobacco pipe exemption really depends on what jurisdiction you are in.

Almost the entire text of this PARAPHERNALIA article is a reprint of a DEA fact-sheet.

Drug (i.e. nicotine) enforcement

The DEA can be understood to reflect the desires of the tobacco industry, which enables the government to collect megabucks in tobacco taxes paid by the addicted slave customers. The term PARAPHERNALIA (paranoia + infernal + alien, get it?) is a slander directed at any alternative smoking method instead of the hot-burning overdose nicotine cigaret format (700 mg. every time you want a "smoke") unto which the tobacco industry looks for its profit.

The laws against marijuana protect the tobacco industry by delaying the popularization of "paraphernalia"-- i.e. their worst nightmare is that with the legalization of cannabis the rational, conservative practice of using a vaporizer-- or, failing the money, a one-hitter or minitoke utensil will be legalized on its coattails so to speak, and spill over into the masses of hotburning-overdose slave nicotine cigaret addicts thus exterminating the industry profit margin. A quarter-inch diameter crater with a screen in it can permit twenty-eight separate 25-mg. servings from one typical commercial 700 mg. overdose.

Hot-burning-overdose methods of smoking cannabis produce health damage which can be conveniently attributed to the cannabis, thus supporting the argument for repressive laws.

Mixing cannabis with tobacco (as in "blunts", widely used by youngsters concealing their cannabis in a cigar-skin) can expedite profitable nicotine addictions.Tokerdesigner (talk) 21:51, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Harm Reduction

(This was submitted to Cigar:talk, and archived among 2006 entries.)

Smokers should have an alternative to the bipolarity of "all or nothing"-- either purchasing and consuming tobacco in expensive giant overdoses of several grams each or cold turkey quitting.

So, how about including a reminder that with an appropriate utensil one may reduce the serving size of "a smoke" from an entire cigar each time you light up, down to 25 mg.:

l. Start with a quarter-inch socket wrench.

2. Push a screen (Mesh 40) about 3/16" of the way into the hex end.

3. Push a quarter-inch (outer diameter) flexible plastic tube into the other (square, or driver") end. This should be long enough to give the smoke time to cool down before it reaches you.

4. Wrap duct tape around the seam.

5. Wire on a big safety pin for occasional clearing of screen windows.

6. Have on hand prickly pipe cleaners, q-tips, and a small bottle of rubbing alcohol for clean-outs (infrequent).

7. Have one or more small cases in which to carry cigar(s) around so you can choose which flavor of toke you at any particular time.

With a razor knife cut off a tiny bit of the cigar (25 mg.) and stuff it in the screened end of your utensil. While sucking slow to achieve low burning temperature, light sparingly. You will find you can suck continuously up to four seconds before filling your mouth, and then "puff" the acquired material quickly out the nose to resume the slow sucking process for several seconds longer.

If you aren't afraid what others think, this can save you a ton of money (the hell with their profit margin) and it eliminates the side stream smoke "liberals" are supposedly enraged about.

If there is any danger cops will inspect your car and object to such a utensil, have your congressman send you a letter certifying it is for safe hygienic tobacco use.

all>—Preceding unsigned comment added by Tokerdesigner (talk • contribs) 00:34, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

The following is a note left on a user page:

"Reachforth" vs "Tobackgo"

Sorry to bring you "back" to September 23, but when you changed the word "cannabis" to "tobacco" you got in the way of warning especially youngsters that the synergy of tobacco and cannabis is harmful not because of the cannabis but because of the tobacco. The WHO (est. 2003) says tobacco-- mainly cigarets-- is killing 5.3 million human beings a year, the greatest genocide in the history of the planet, meanwhile no one offers any proof that riefer ever killed anyone. Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Dr.W._Gravy"

Vaporizer! Vaporizer! Vaporizer! -- or, failing the money(??), a minitoke utensil

Having read your comment about "blunts" on the Cannabis smoking discussion page, I wondered, (a) Where does he get the money to waste all that riefer in a big fat 1500° F. smoking device, and (b) why does he tolerate the admixture of nicotine (in the cigar wrapper)?

I know some cannabis users are proud of how much herb they can burn up without getting tobacco cancer etc., but think seriously about outgrowing all that chauvinism. My suggestion is, if you can afford to burn joint- and blunt-loads of riefer, you can afford a 410° F. (or lower) vaporizer, ranging from the $600 Volcano (endorsed by NORML Executive Director Allen F. St. Pierre) on down through various brands in the $200 range. If you are hooked on tobacco and have thought of getting rid of the habit, consider having two vaporizers, one for tobacco (you can knife off a tiny piece of cigar and use it in the vaporizer) and one for cannabis (without any stench of tobacco in it).

If you're not offended by my tone or intrusion in your life making these suggestions, try the Wikiversity article 1 which includes various ways to make or get an anti-overdose, low-temperature-burning minitoke utensil-- more cannabinol, less carbon monoxide-- which is not as good as a vaporizer but almost as good.Tokerdesigner (talk) 02:23, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Dude

Man you need to realise what verifibility is. you constantly rant on how large bowls joints blunts etc burn hot and destroy the THC however according to yourself you have no proof your pulling this out of your ass. if you do have proof reference it. otherwise stop scaring people away from the many options for smoking weed and recklesly promoting your PREFERENCE. Potheadpoet (talk) 16:59, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

071519wed1856CST

In various rants which you can find under User:tokerdesigner, I have been making the point that verification is hard to find because Big Tobackgo has ways to retaliate against any researchers with real lab equipment who take on the job of discrediting hot-burning-overdose smoking devices (their profit margin depends on the 1500° F cigaret). I am preparing e-mails to John Holmes (U Vermont), Donald Tashkin (UCLA) and others and we'll see if they dare risk losing their funding, accreditation, tenure, etc. (You can google the above names to see what their angle on the smoking issue is.)

I would expect that if a 5/16th"-diameter cigaret, puffed on, burns at 1500° a blunt might be even hotter. You can look up the NORML/MAPS 2007 research on the Volcano Vaporizer and NORML exec. Director St.Pierre's endorsement, where they make the point that the low-temperature vaporizer saves THC.

Taking you at your word that you don't intend to smoke cigarets, it is generally said that cigar smokers "don't inhale" whereas the point of a blunt is to inhale, to get the cannabinol, and you are inhaling some nicotine from the cigar leaf.

Concerning the Hot box, I have added a paragraph on Breathbonnet (Cannabis smoking)which is a cheap handy portable Hot box in its way. My own experience (they'll get me for Original Research) is that you can breathe your own warm breath for a couple of minutes or more with perfect safety. In fact, the CO2 is good for the windpipe linings and makes it possible to do more tokes.

$$$-- if you did a $25 quarter ounce every week that's $1300 a year so it seems to me you can afford a vaporizer. (When I get access to a scanner I will submit a diagram of a home-made vaporizer system to the Cannabis smoking article and failing that to my talk page.) You could certainly use a vaporizer in the hot box as you describe it and say goodbye to carbon monoxide.

I don't really believe in the theory of "tolerance" for cannabis but that may depend on the individual. My testimony is that your "Miracle-wonder" superprophetic batteries are recharged in 47 hours (that's Superprophetic for about two days) just like orgasm. Meanwhile, when I have herb, I don't hesitate to toke every day, especially about 5:55 a.m. (overnight is an adequate recharge) and rarely more than ten single tokes per 2 days. That would be 1826 x 25-mg. single tokes a year, or about 2 ounces after 16-mesh screening-- about $500-600. We're both beating a pack-a-day hot-burning-overdose nicotine slave, $2000/yr. in high-tax states.

If the above bugs you, you have permission to erase it as I have recently learned how to use the "Copy" and "Paste" edit functions and have saved this semi-anonymous essay for my own future reuse.Tokerdesigner (talk) 00:30, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Potheadpoet"

Please sign your comments

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. Jaysweet (talk) 02:02, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Censorship

There is a difference between censorship and editorial decision-making. I trimmed the Cannabis smoking article because it was a clumsy, unfocused article. It frequently veered off into minutiae that was not particularly encyclopedic, and almost the entirely article is unsourced. The changes I made today are just the beginning; eventually I hope to have a clear, concise article that summarizes the topic in an encyclopedic manner and in a way that is coherent and easy-to-read.

Your comment about the reasons for including one-hitters demonstrates that you still don't understand why people are objecting to your attempts to manipulate the article to push your own personal point of view. Please read WP:NPOV and WP:SOAPBOX before you edit the article again. (I would appreciate if you would just confirm to me that you have read those two pages if you reply) Wikipedia is not here to try to give "young people" tips on what marijuana smoking devices they should or should not use. Wikipedia is here to provide sourced, verifiable information, preferably from secondary sources such as news article, etc., to present established facts.

Your musing about the "Big Tobackgo" conspiracy is not productive. While you may whole-heartedly believe you are correct, let me assure you that there are hordes of other people who have all kinds of differing viewpoints who are also certain they are correct. And many of those people are also certain, in their own minds, that if they could just convince Wikipedia to push their point of view, they could save lives. Everybody has their pet issue, as do you. Wikipedia is not the place for it. --Jaysweet (talk) 02:10, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No more nonsense.

Mini-toke(smoking utensil)

A tag has been placed on Mini-toke(smoking utensil), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the page appears to have no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the page's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself.

If the page you created was a test, please use the sandbox for any other experiments you would like to do. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions about this. PMDrive1061 (talk) 01:22, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mini-toke(smoking utensil)

A tag has been placed on Mini-toke(smoking utensil), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the page appears to have no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the page's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself.

If the page you created was a test, please use the sandbox for any other experiments you would like to do. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions about this. PMDrive1061 (talk) 01:22, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to create inappropriate pages such as Mini-toke(smoking utensil), you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. NawlinWiki (talk) 01:31, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No content in Category:One-hitter(smoking reduction utensil)

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Category:One-hitter(smoking reduction utensil), by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Category:One-hitter(smoking reduction utensil) has been empty for at least four days, and its only content has been links to parent categories. (CSD C1).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Category:One-hitter(smoking reduction utensil), please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 22:30, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Talk pages

Hi Toker, I just wanted to let you know you should try not to make such major revisions to your comments on talk pages, especially so long after you've left them and definitely after someone has responded. If you want to have a place to work on a draft, you can create a subpage to your user space or to the article in question to use as a sandbox. Have a good one. NJGW (talk) 02:29, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Box hitters

In response to your statement on my talk page, I wasn't debating that one-hitters are advantageous; I'm sure they hold several advantages and drawbacks as do most all forms of smoking. However, your statement on the Cannabis smoking page reading: "Don't smoke any material that does not grind through a 1/16th-inch screen strainer-- it can be used in tea instead." is a guide, not a neutral observation. Try to retool the statement so that it is less of a direction and more of an informative point. Peace--George The Man (talk) 06:27, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

vandal at 216.26.205.14

"Attention:

This IP address, 216.26.205.14, is registered to Thunder Bay Catholic District School Board and may be shared by multiple users of an educational institution. If the institution uses proxy servers, this IP address may represent many users at many physical computers."

Add that there may be users at several different schools who don't know each other. I had an idea that when anyone from this address edits, they should get an immediate pop-up message (not waiting until after the edit is saved), trying to solicit cooperation from other local users:

Dear Thunder Bay District Students,

Someone at your (give details) IP address has been damaging Wikipedia articles. A string of 20 detailed warnings on the 216.26.205.14 Discussion Page has apparently not been noticed by the blunderer. In the name of the billions of good folks worldwide who count on Wikipedia for accurate information, please help us by tracking this individual down and gently persuading them to take a look at the Contributions page, review the nature of each attack and reasons given for reverting it, etc., and maybe find a partner with which to work henceforth on Wikipedia articles, including reading all boring but relevant tutorials together. With mutual support let us hope the psychological issues may be resolved because we don't want to lose the positive energies of this person in the long term (etc. etc.). --Wiki-bot(give details).Tokerdesigner (talk) 00:50, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:J.delanoy"

May 2009

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Talk:Smoking pipe (tobacco). Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Please stop it. Smoking pipe (tobacco) is about tobacco, not cannabis. Frotz (talk) 05:13, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Cannabis

You are invited to join WikiProject Cannabis, a WikiProject dedicated to improving articles related to Cannabis. You received this invitation because of your history editing articles related to the plant. The WikiProject Cannabis group discussion is here. If you are interested in joining, please visit the project page, and add your name to the list of participants.

e-cigarette

I apologize for the tone [it's something I'm working on]. When I said that, I was referring strictly to the wording of the title and the previous MOS errors I had corrected prior; it said E(electronic)cigarette. And I made that comment based on that. I'm not sure I'm following you on the THC-formula stuff after. It was a rhetorical question lol. sorry, tommy talk 00:42, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

???

Why are you going to various cannabis-related articles putting info about "screened" bowls (vs a regular pipe; like it makes any difference) and then using a "How-to" reference as its source? Wikipedia is not how-to. tommytalk2me 01:09, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Again...

Why are you using talk pages as a reference? A8UDI talk 01:05, 21 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

October 2009

Please do not use styles that are unusual, inappropriate or difficult to understand in articles, as you did in Cannabis smoking. There is a Manual of Style that should be followed. Thank you. Edits like this aren't appropriate. At the bare minimum, that requires a good reference. A8UDI talk 16:53, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite block

Despite numerous warnings, this account continues to add unreferenced information to various wikipedia pages.

I may well understand that various information about cannabis smoking may not be available in sources considered reliable by wikipedia. However this does not mean that the very basic wikipedia policy, wikipedia:Verifiability, may be ignored.

The account will be unblocked when the user explicitly promises to follow the policy and to supply valid references to the added information without further reminders. - Altenmann >t 20:30, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unblocked

I have unblocked you after discussion about this block at Administrator's noticeboard/Incidents. Please understand, however, that it is essential that you follow WP:V and reference the additions you make to article, and use good sources to do so. Wikipedia is not a how-to guide and references to Wiki-How are not appropriate. You are a long term contributor in your area of interest, and there is no reason you can't document the information you add. If you have a question about a source, you can get outside opinion about whether it is valid by posting it at the reliable sources noticeboard. You also could get consensus about any questionable content by first discussing it on the article's talk page. Feel free to drop me a note if you have questions. You may also consider consulting editors at the Wikiproject posted above, as it appears you would find other editors with similar interests. Xymmax ^{So let it be written} _{So let it be done} 16:19, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Instruction manuals. While Wikipedia has descriptions of people, places and things, an article should not read like a "how-to" style, owners manual, advice column (legal, medical or otherwise) or suggestion box. This includes tutorials, walk-throughs, instruction manuals, game guides, and recipes.[5] If you are interested in a "how-to" type of manual, you may want to look at wikiHow or our sister project, Wikibooks.

Thank you for your action.

1. I appreciate your suggestion to consult the Cannabis Wikiproject, which I will do.

2. I have cited the paragraph above to show that WP:NOTHOWTO does not forbid references to wikiHow and does not say they are "not appropriate"-- despite the opinion of User:Altenmann and two (2) other editors. Those references, in fact, serve to prevent the WP articles in question from reading like a "how-to" guide.

3. It is true that the WP article Cannabis smoking ranks at the top of the Google search listings, as do several other WP cannabis-related articles, indicating that these articles are the most-consulted sources on the planet for that subject matter! This can not be the result only of some esoteric interest of a few specialists but rather indicates that readers are seeking a how-to guide to how to smoke cannabis-- giving them the benefit of the doubt, they want to know how to do it safely and beneficially rather than harmfully. I took criticisms to heart about introducing such information in the article(s) themselves, and substituted references to the wikiHow articles which, if you will examine them, are written, as best I could, in an encyclopedic manner with compromises where necessary to attain the instructive tone desired by wikiHow readers. Thus by means of such references WP, without including how-to info in the articles, provides readers with access to the information they are obviously seeking.

4. The wikiHow articles contain needed evidence that relatively safe, affordable, non-abusive alternatives to the hot-burning overdose "joint", big-"bowl" pipe etc. actually do exist as especially the tobackgo industry with its profit margin based on overdose would not want readers to know.

5. To get an idea of the attitude and modus operandi of User:Altenman:Contributions, look at the Kief article which he abruptly reduced from c. 4000 bytes (the length of the article over a span of at least two years) to c.1000. Note the amount of time he gave to considering that edit, which succeeded others to a series of User:Tokerdesigner-edited articles in short order.Tokerdesigner (talk) 16:07, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the message. I agree that the WP:NOTHOWTO does not forbid the links to WikiHow. Rather, it expresses that the goal of creating a comprehensive article on the subject should not be turned into an set of instructions on how to accomplish a particular project. The links to WikiHow, when used as references, are forbidden as part of the Verifiability policy in WP:SOURCES, which I linked to earlier. Specifically, take a look at the section about self-published sources, which explicitly mentions wikis. Because there is no way to know the identity of the person adding the information, the source cannot be considered reliable. I suspect that other editors at the wikiproject will agree. Take care, Xymmax ^{So let it be written} _{So let it be done} 22:02, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I was out for a long time, so I could not deliver more detail in the Administrator's noticeboard/Incidents. In addition to notices from other users in his talk page, I had discussion with this user in some article talk pages. He himself raised an issue of lacking sources. I did tell him that this does not invalidate wikipedia policies.

Please notice that my indefinite block was not and infinite block/ban. As you may have seen from the phrasing of my note, its purpose was to force him to make a pledge to comply with the policy. I really don't want to ban him from the wikipedia: he seems to know the subjects he writes about. - Altenmann >t 22:10, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

A8UDI talk 01:33, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

A8UDI talk 02:08, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikihow

You can't use Wikihow as a reference. I would add details but I think you know about this. All references to Wikihow now need to be removed. Please find an acceptable third party citation. Thanks. Mjpresson (talk) 22:16, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re:WP:NOTHOWTO

Instruction manuals. While Wikipedia has descriptions of people, places and things, an article should not read like a "how-to" style, owners manual, advice column (legal, medical or otherwise) or suggestion box. This includes tutorials, walk-throughs, instruction manuals, game guides, and recipes.[5] If you are interested in a "how-to" type of manual, you may want to look at wikiHow or our sister project, Wikibooks.

Thank you for your attention.

1. I have cited the paragraph above to show that WP:NOTHOWTO does not forbid references to wikiHow and does not say they are "not appropriate"-- despite the opinion of User:Altenmann (see recent edits to Kief article) and two (2) other editors. Those references, in fact, serve to prevent the WP articles in question from reading like a "how-to" guide.

2. The WP article Cannabis smoking ranks at the top of the Google search listings, as do several other WP cannabis-related articles, indicating that these articles are the most-consulted sources on the planet for that subject matter! This can not be the result only of some esoteric interest of a few specialists but rather indicates that readers are seeking a how-to guide (as promised by the title Cannabis smoking) to how to smoke cannabis-- giving them the benefit of the doubt, they want to know how to do it safely and beneficially rather than harmfully. I took criticisms to heart about introducing such information into the article(s) themselves, and substituted references to the wikiHow articles which, if you will examine them, are written, as best I could, in an encyclopedic manner with compromises where necessary to attain the instructive tone desired by wikiHow readers. Thus by means of such references WP, without including how-to info in the articles, provides readers with access to the information they are obviously seeking.

3. The cited wikiHow articles contain needed evidence that relatively safe, affordable, non-abusive alternatives to the hot-burning overdose "joint", big-"bowl" pipe etc. actually do exist, as especially the tobackgo industry with its profit margin based on overdose may not want readers to know. This is relevant, urgently required information the absence of which misleads especially young readers into practices which cause health and behavior damage widely blamed on the cannabis instead of on the faulty smoking methods used. (Lack of warnings about overdose and about mixing with tobacco can contribute to nicotine addiction and, eventually, to the 6,000,000-per-year (American Cancer Society prediction for 2010) cigarette holocaust.) WP has a duty to its readers, not to business-as-usual as defined by cigarette (and rolling-paper) companies.

4. Mainstream secondary references on this topic are hard to find due to the intimidation exercised by Big Tobackgo, its money, and its bought legislators and governments. Try to imagine any peer-review journal publishing any details about a proper or better way to use cannabis.

As urged by User:Xymmax I will bring this up on the newly established Wikiproject:Cannabis page. Thanx again.Tokerdesigner (talk) 17:16, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Verifiability

I didn't have time to read the long essay you placed on my talk page. Wikipedia has been through this before with you, reading your talk page. Don't use WikiHow as a reference. It will be removed. Wikipedia does not know that you didn't write the wikihow articles but something tells me otherwise. Mjpresson (talk) 17:28, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Jeez, that Mjpresson makes a lot of grammar errors--yikes! Mjpresson (talk) 19:12, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

wikiHow

1. Sorry I was detained training from one big city computer to another (can't let Big 2Wackgo find out who's blowing their cover) and didn't answer your later message promptly. Also I got detained by a mysterious curiosity to research the dark side of "Wikipedia" (or jMMpresson?). Sorry about the stroke and the alcohol, I hope "he" tried Mj and that it was helpful. Holding onto/staring into cameras can eat up so much time a guy doesn't get around to healthful carpentry exercise and developing his handwork sensitivities. And wikiHow is awfully tame.

2. I am perplexed that you didn't have time to read my "long essay" (with the important WP:NOTHOWTO quote), carefully carved into bite-size chunks (paragraphs)-- isn't 6,000,000 per year enough deaths for you?-- but fortunately it lies in cyberHistory, like a corpse that will not die, ready for when you do have time to review it. Unfortunately it's going to be awkward discussing with the couple of dozen signatories at WikiProject Cannabis why some editor issues warnings to me but can't read my defense of the conduct involved. (Maybe it's Coffin Joe's m.o.?) I will now delay that a couple of days so you have time to reconsider.

3. Also the Kief edits will have to be brought up. Why did User:Altenmann, after four (4) minutes of consideration since a previous edit, abruptly axe 3000 of 4000 bytes from an article which WP editors had seen fit to maintain at about the same length for cver 2 years?Tokerdesigner (talk) 20:00, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

By the way (see History) the "essay" does contain a clear overt admission that tokerdesigner wrote the wikiHow articles, as does the wikiHow History file. That is irrelevant, the article, especially the diagram, is EVIDENCE that an equipment option exists, despite corporate efforts to suppress such evidence. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tokerdesigner (talk • contribs) 20:07, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A note regarding user "Tokerdesigner"

Posting your original research on another Wiki, then posting to Wikipedia using your wikihow entry as a reference is to me is disruptive and shady beyond belief and completely antithetical to the policies of Wikipedia. I don't post this on Toker's talk page as it's already quite a read on this particular issue. Go ahead and "bring up" the edits you spoke of. Go ahead and continue trying to restore your citations that reference--specifically--yourself. Mjpresson (talk) 21:31, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

1. What the hell are you threatening to do-- sic Joe Coffin on me?

2. The technical reason that I used the wikiHow articles is that the Typewriter-Compliant Diagrams would have eaten up too much space in a WP article and been objected to, and I don't have the techknowledge or facility yet to make them into jpg-files. (Remember, I'm ghosthosting on various IP's to avoid getting caught by Big 2Wackgo.)

3. I wouldn't mind abandoning the name "Tokerdesigner". For years I thought the word "toker" meant a utensil used for low-temperature smoking by sucking slow instead of the short hot puff used by $igarette addicts (when that goes beyond 2 seconds, it is known as a "bogart" after the film hero who died age 57 of $igarette cancer, what a drag). Slang has warped the word to mean "someone who smokes cannabis", a divisive, racist usage.

4. Gaaaawd (i.e. tobackgo) must have sent you to hound me over cannabis edits. I note your hero/alter ego jMM, born 13 March 1936, is exactly 57 days older than my beloved big brother. I bet he is an exact-day birthmate of one of my brother's school friends that turned him against me. My brother, now retired, had a 30-year career with the Propa & Ganda Company which, while he was there, famously killed millions of trillions of germs. Now there's some death! Get Joe to make a movie about that company.Tokerdesigner (talk) 17:56, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This user is totally stalking me, trying to ridicule my edits, and uses his own wiki-posts as references. This is a complete and utter loser. If you want to see the saga of an asshole, see his talk page. A complete antipolicy wank who, until I edited one of his articles, never posted an edit outside of the Marijuana field, an expected run of 5 edits to articles I wrote immediately after becoming aware of me. This is the first request to have Tokerdesigner banned as his recent block for disruption proved to be futile. Mjpresson (talk) 18:23, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And your little marijuana drawings and inventions will never deface wikipedia.Mjpresson (talk) 18:31, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Do not drive, operate heavy machinery, or edit Wikipedia while taking this medication."

"Complete and utter loser... asshole"

"And your little marijuana drawings and inventions will never deface wikipedia."

1. In the second slightly more civil quote, User:Mjpresson lets slip what may be a basic attitude: anything "little" is objected to in reference to cannabis usage. Presumably if the pipe has a bigger diameter and burns hotter, causing a more heroic "hit", Mj has more respect for it (a Coffin Joe dosage)? Or he is perhaps a sockpuppet for Big Tobackgo, trying to censor information about microdosage smoking equipment which will destroy his client's trillion-dollar profit empire built on sledgehammer overdose $igarettes? Sir, I forgive you on grounds of insanity (now go ahead and make the movie).

2. The recent "block for disruption" against User:Tokerdesigner lost credibility because its author User:Altenmann had just finished abruptly reducing article Kief from its size of 4000 bytes, maintained by dozens of editors over two years, to 1000.Tokerdesigner (talk) 01:39, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WARNING

Your edit of Kief is reverted. You have been warned multiple times, Please don't add texts to articles without providing references to reliable sources, per wikipedia policy. - Altenmann >t 04:36, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Intrusive requests

Please avoid inserting requests of this type at all costs. It's extremely intrusive and inharmonious to the appearance of articles.

Peter ^Isotalo 12:02, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The request didn't produce any results; I did. I walked in on the article by chance since I was going through old watchlist articles. It had nothing to do with your edits. In this case, it's also quite likely that you would have come across the image on your own had you only looked around a bit in history of smoking or the appropriate Commons category.

I really don't think it's a good idea to add requests unless you've made a minimum effort of finding one yourself, and if you do, it should be with the appropriate templates without all sorts of odd-ball additions like {{documentation}} added, and under no circumstances should you revert attempts to amend such obvious infelicities.

Peter ^Isotalo 01:45, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

November 2009

Please desist from adding uncited claims regarding cannabis to midwakh. This is the only warning you will receive; do it again and you will be blocked. — Hex (❝?!❞) 21:51, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Dugout (smoking)

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Dugout (smoking). We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dugout (smoking). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:10, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your contribution to the Talk:Smoking pipe (non-tobacco)‎ page

Hi, the article page, associated with the talk page you contributed to is only a redirect to a section in the Pipe smoking page. The page Smoking pipe (non-tobacco) really could do with existing in its own right. You seem pretty knowlegable on the subject and I was wondering if you'd consider writting it? Obscurasky (talk) 01:52, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

December 2009

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits, such as those you made to Smoking pipe (tobacco). If you vandalize Wikipedia again, you will be blocked from editing. I'm convinced now that you are a single-purpose editor. For the last time, please stop. Frotz (talk) 03:50, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Help Please

I'm new to WikiProject Cannabis and I was wondering how I add an article to a category. You see, I created the page Black Ranger (Cannabis) and I wanted to add it to the template of Cannabis strains but I can't seem to be able to figure it out. So help.

--Anondoesnotforget (talk) 21:44, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Just a quick "thanks" for the edits you have made in regards to cannabis/marijuana. The stigma in society on its use makes it a target for vandalism and judgmental editors. Keep up the good work, and thanks again. Jmlk 1 7 22:09, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Cigars

I realize this is only tangential to your primary interests at WP, but I just thought I'd mention that I'm attempting to launch WikiProject Cigars, which might be something emulated by others down the road in related fields. As I am attempting to demonstrate at least nodding interest in the topic among WP editors, I invite you to add your comments at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Proposals/Cigars. Thanks! —Tim Carrite (talk) 18:00, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please cite a source for your edits

Hi Tokerdesigner, please do not add that joints burn at 700°C oxidising cannabinoids to the cannabis article or to the joint article, without citing a reliable source so that we can all verify this information. I've searched to find a source myself, but can't find any, except for mirrors of wikipedia. Another editor has started a discussion at: Talk:Cannabis_(drug)#Joint_Photo_Description.2C_Part_II about this. SmartSE (talk) 23:20, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Smartse|Re: Cannabis (drug)| 4 January 2011

Talkback

Giftiger wunsch|ts=22:06, 5 January 2011

June 2011

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Cannabis smoking, you may be blocked from editing. Please stop violating WP:3RR Mjpresson (talk) 23:56, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just a note on this, Tokerdesigner was nowhere near violating 3RR, and Mjpresson was reverting just as often as Tokerdesigner (pot-kettle-black). -- Atama頭 23:00, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked per WP:ANI discussion

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for per the discussion at the administrators's incident noticeboard regarding your disruptive and repeated advocacy at the cannabis smoking article. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Atama頭 19:49, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Tokerdesigner (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

To request that the block, though it is expiring shortly, be invalidated on grounds that it was obtained through fraud; the reason for this request is to create on this talk page a venue for discussing the faulty mechanisms whereby the block was created and the questionable policy intentions of those who promoted the block as seen in recent edits. This is meant in the interest of public health and of the good reputation of Wikipedia as immune to manipulation by special interests. Tokerdesigner (talk) 2:16 pm, Today (UTC−4)

Decline reason:

I see no part of your unblock request that addresses your behavior. Rather, it complains about the actions of others, which will not get your block lifted early. I suggest reading this guide before posting another request. TN X Man 18:22, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Continued advocacy and accusations

Hi Toker, I noticed that you have continued to edit in a way that is inappropriate. You have now been told time and time again that including your "health advice" without any sources to back it up is considered soapboxing and yet you have continued, even after being blocked for doing so less than one month ago. Personally, I'm a bit fed up of trying to help you to edit constructively and getting nowhere. Once again, I will offer to help you if you want to change your ways, but if this continues I can't see how it will be possible for you to continue editing here. That isn't meant as a threat, I just wish to make it clear to you. We (me, you, Mjpresson and readers) would all like the cannabis-related articles to be improved, but changes need to be made using sources written by knowledgable authors, not our own personal knowledge. Try using google books and see what you can find, for example. Also, your continued accusations against other editors somehow being puppets of the tobacco industry have been duly noted, can I also please remind you to focus on content, rather than editors. Thank you SmartSE (talk) 08:29, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Drop the stick

...and step slowly away from the horse carcass, please.

Your comments at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cannabis#Cannabis smoking and other articles under attack have been collapsed. Please do not continue to use that section as a soapbox. You've been repeatedly warned about that behaviour, and if it happens again you will be blocked. Try to treat different issues which concern you as different topics to be handled one by one rather than maintaining huge manifestos and trying to get the entire lot enacted at once. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 06:28, 20 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 month for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 08:39, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Having failed to heed the above advice, it seems only an escalation of your previous block is likely to get through to you. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 08:40, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It seems only an escalation of your previous block is likely to get through to you."

Seems like thumperward has here taken on the rhetoric of Chester Markel, who wrote up the vote procedures to block Tokerdesigner at ANI. (Link pending to CM's edits and statements and to later discussion, after Tokerdesigner was banned for one week for "soapboxing" etc., of the news that Chester Markel had been banned as an exposed "sockpuppet.")

Mjpresson denied knowing Chester Markel, but Tokerdesigner's "double fate (or honor?)" here is that Mjpresson's previous partner in controversy versus Tokerdesigner, Altenmann, who blocked Tokerdesigner (reversed in one day) in late 2009, was also banned for "sockpuppetry", on April 11, 2010. Is there something about Tokerdesigner sockpuppeteers don't like? Anyway, Tokerdesigner, in Its own defense, suggests investigating whether Chester Markel, John254 etc. might have been sockpuppets of Altenmann.

For purpose of discussion of the cannabis articles' issues with thumperward, SmartSE, Mjpresson, Another Believer or any other editors I will continue adding observations and suggestions here on a day by day basis, leaving till later whether to apply for a block appeal.Tokerdesigner (talk) 23:58, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Four main issues have in my opinion not been addressed in any discussion, rather this editor was sanctioned for trying to address them:

Deletion from Cannabis smoking and Hashish of the reference to Australian Department of Health paper containing warning against practice of mixing cannabis with tobacco which "can cause unintended nicotine addiction".

Positioning cigarette advertising WP:SPAM, alias picture of "person smoking a joint", with 250 pixels (larger than usual), at the top of the Cannabis smoking article.

Deleting from that article, from One hitter (smoking) and others, numerous pictures of small-bowl or "one-hitter"-type pipes which, for inhalant herbal use, constitute the principal alternative-- or competition-- to cigarettes, alias "joints".

Deleting references to do-it-yourself instructions on wikiHow describing how to make one's own narrow-gauge utensil, how to make a crater screen for it, how to sift herb before use etc.

Recollections of the ANI process

While you can't respond directly to the matter, I've raised the above soapboxing at WP:ANI in this thread. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 16:29, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

110629

hay man what should i us?

Dosisverminderung

Studien über Vergleiche mit Tabak gelten nur bei Überdosis

Speedy deletion of Minitoke

Concerning minitoke

Product

Service

Vaporizers

Minitoke-- not as good but cheaper

Minitoke

Blunts

Original research

The case for minitoke (one-hitter) info

Apologies

More about Jay

March 2008

Related to the picture

Suggestions how the equipment shown can be made safer and more useful:

1. Long tube = low temperature at user end

2. Suck-discipline

3. Critique of the picture (in article, Smoking pipe)

4. Big Bowl Baloney

5. Midwakh

6. Kiseru

7. Socket-wrenchone-hitter

8. Hose-nipple

9. Hard wood

10. Soft wood

11. Traditional?

12. Perhaps the article could be titled Smoking pipe (cannabis and other herbs).

13. Single article?

Alternative techniques -- dosage miniaturization

The 700-mg. format

Miniature utensil

Kiseru, Midwakh

From 700 mg. to 25 mg. in one "cigaret break"

Even yours looks better with an air bonnet on it

Cognitive behavior therapy-- Cttttin' down

Smoother

Screen maintenance utensil etc.

Alternative herb choices

Blunts

Article fails to mention role of "blunts" in promoting nicotine addition among youngsters

Big Tobackgo

Big Pharma

Legitimate Product?

Drug (i.e. nicotine) enforcement

Harm Reduction

"Reachforth" vs "Tobackgo"

Vaporizer! Vaporizer! Vaporizer! -- or, failing the money(??), a minitoke utensil

Dude

Please sign your comments

Censorship

No more nonsense.

Mini-toke(smoking utensil)

Mini-toke(smoking utensil)

No content in Category:One-hitter(smoking reduction utensil)

Talk pages

Box hitters

vandal at 216.26.205.14

May 2009

WikiProject Cannabis

e-cigarette

???

Again...

October 2009

Indefinite block

Unblocked

Talkback

Talkback

Wikihow

Re:WP:NOTHOWTO

Verifiability

wikiHow

A note regarding user "Tokerdesigner"

"Complete and utter loser... asshole"

WARNING

Intrusive requests

7. Socket-wrench one-hitter