Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cannabis/420 Collaboration/2017

Origins

See also: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cannabis § 4/20 editathon

To Do

Completed list of tasks

see if User:AlexNewArtBot can be used to create a list of new cannabis-related articles  Done @Bamyers99: I wonder if you might be able to help with this task? I've read "How to add feeds to the new article bot", but this is definitely outside my comfort zone. If this is something you can do very quickly and easily, and are willing to help, I'd appreciate your support, otherwise I'll try to tackle this later. As for rules, I'm thinking key words might include: cannabis, marijuana, hemp, sativa, indica, ruderalis, cannabinoid, ganja, kief, hashish, tetrahydrocannabinol, and cannabidiol. This would be an ongoing list for WikiProject Cannabis, not a single-use list for the upcoming 420 collaboration. ---Another Believer (Talk) 22:28, 18 January 2017 (UTC) @Another Believer: I have added it with the following rules. The first results will be available after the bot runs on January 19. --Bamyers99 (talk) 00:38, 19 January 2017 (UTC) @Bamyers99: Wow, that was fast! Thank you so much. I added the WikiProject Cannabis category, which I hope is okay, and I appreciate your help. ---Another Believer (Talk) 00:46, 19 January 2017 (UTC) create talk page template for articles created/improved during the campaign, similar to Template:ArtAndFeminism2016 article / Template:Wiki Loves Pride 2016  Done see Template:420Collaboration2017 ---Another Believer (Talk) 03:35, 30 January 2017 (UTC) create talk page template for categories created during the campaign, similar to Template:Wiki Loves Pride 2016 category  Done see Template:420Collaboration2017category ---Another Believer (Talk) 16:17, 30 January 2017 (UTC) create talk page template for templates created during the campaign, similar to Template:Wiki Loves Pride 2016 template  Done see Template:420Collaboration2017template ---Another Believer (Talk) 16:19, 30 January 2017 (UTC) create Category:420 Collaboration 2017 and its subcategories Category:Articles created or improved during 420 Collaboration 2017, Category:Categories created during 420 Collaboration 2017, and Category:Templates created during 420 Collaboration 2017  Done ---Another Believer (Talk) 16:17, 30 January 2017 (UTC) reach out to WMF's Communications team  Done ---Another Believer (Talk) 16:49, 1 March 2017 (UTC) add above talk page templates (with explanation of how they should be used) to campaign page  Done ---Another Believer (Talk) 22:07, 31 January 2017 (UTC) Can we somehow add Category:Cannabis stubs to the page to direct volunteers to help expand existing articles? Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 05:13, 4 February 2017 (UTC) @Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney: Great idea! In this edit, I grew the "Red links" section into the "Tasks" section, adding that we'll also encourage participants to expand cannabis stubs and upload media content to Wikimedia Commons. Does this work for you? ---Another Believer (Talk) 05:53, 4 February 2017 (UTC) give notice about this campaign to The Signpost  Done See request at Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/Newsroom/Suggestions#Upcoming_.22420.22_collaboration. ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:21, 3 April 2017 (UTC) distribute WikiProject invitations in April  Done ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:14, 11 April 2017 (UTC) WMF blog draft  Doing... See this section and this draft at Meta-Wiki. ---Another Believer (Talk) 19:18, 6 April 2017 (UTC)  Done See notes in section below re: WMF blog draft. ---Another Believer (Talk) 17:24, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

WP:MEDRS

This is a bit concerning. We have had consistent issues with cannabis advocates blowing off the MEDRS guideline. If you all are going to do this, you must make sure that participants are aware of, and follow, MEDRS. If there is anything I can to educate folks about MEDRS, let me know. Jytdog (talk) 23:16, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

@Jytdog: Thanks for the link. I completely agree and welcome your ideas about how to encourage appropriate sourcing. In the meantime, I've added the link you provided to a newly-created "Resources" section on the project page. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 23:18, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

Also, FWIW, I've notified Wiki Project Med board members and select WikiProject Medicine participants to give them a heads up about this upcoming campaign. My hope is that these groups and other WikiProjects will support this effort. Cannabis-related Wikipedia articles will be much stronger if we have experienced editors, especially those with science and medical backgrounds, contributing. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 23:31, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

As I said the problem is with advocates who don't want to listen or learn. The key thing will be making sure that anybody who participates agrees ahead of time to follow WP policies and guidelines, especially MEDRS. The education project has some training materials - see the section Medical Topics at Wikipedia:Training/For_students. Additionally, the organizers should ride herd on content generated by people who participate so that WP:MED members don't have to clean up after, and fight battles to clean up. (I acknowledge that herding cats is hard!) Jytdog (talk) 00:06, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

I am watching this page to assist with WP:MEDRS issues. I am regularly at WikiProject Medicine and familiar with the sorts of problems which arise in this space. I am just one person, but I will try! Blue Rasberry (talk) 00:40, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

Goals

I added some project goals. I realize everyone has a different reason for contributing to Wikipedia, or this campaign specifically, but I hope these goals are appropriate given Wikipedia's mission. We also want to be sure we're recruiting the right participants, and not folks who are looking to push an agenda or add unreliable information. I am definitely open to messaging changes, so let's discuss here if you have any thoughts. Thanks! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 00:46, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

Since the War on Drugs includes the prohibition of many species of fungi, the line about "battleships, fungi, or your favorite episode of The Simpsons" might want to be reconsidered. -- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 22:12, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

LOL, point taken. I changed it to "butterflies" (thousands categorized, wow). - Brianhe (talk) 22:34, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

I'm wondering, too, if something more neutral sounding than "battleships" would be more appropriate. ... How about "astronauts?" -- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 00:28, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

I'm fine with topic changes. I was just trying to come up with subjects that have been obsessively curated by Wikipedia editors. :) ---Another Believer _(Talk) 15:26, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Do we want to set any quantitative goals like creating 100 new articles, or similar? We could even display a "percentage completed" bar. This is not required, but just throwing out ideas. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 21:27, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

Just me personally, I don't think quantitative goals are necessary. If we do really well we can trumpet it louder, if it's just us a couple other editors doing our usual thing, we can just be happy with that. Might as well leave our expectations open and just see what happens. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 21:54, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

I think that sounds great, Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney. No need to set expectations. My thinking was just setting a goal to mention in WikiProject invitations, such as "We hope you'll help us with our goal of creating 100 new cannabis-related articles." I'm fine not setting numerical goals, though. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 21:56, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

At this point it seems quite likely we'll exceed 100 new articles, and a bunch of improved articles, templates, cats, and work on other languages. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 00:21, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

I've had "100" as a goal in the back of my head for a while, so I'm glad to see we're on track. We might even get to 100 category, surprisingly! Well done, all! I'm really looking forward to continuing this work until the end of the month. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 01:56, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

Something else: there might be enough traffic on 420 (cannabis culture) to make the weekly Top 25 Report. The views just on 4/19 and 4/20 would have put it about #20 on last week's report. It might be a good idea to approach the folks who put it together about the part this project may have played. - Bri (talk) 03:38, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

Not sure I'll be able to keep up, but my goal is to create 5 articles/day until the end of the month to help get us over the 100 new articles mark. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 22:31, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Replying to myself -- maybe better than I predicted Wikipedia:Top 25 Report/April 16 to 22, 2017 has 420 at #9. Maybe this should be better than "C" class for next year??? - Bri (talk) 18:35, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

This Collab came at an awful time for me since I'm in the middle of a lot of big moves (am posting from a hotel in the middle of nowhere on day 2 of a 3 day drive) but I aim to complete 10 more articles before the collab closes. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 05:42, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Like ---Another Believer _(Talk) 15:22, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Wikiprojects Invitations section

The phrase "recreational drug" (redirects to: Cannabis (drug)) is politically charged, and should be avoided. The neutral phrase that is preferable in this sentence about cannabis' versatility is "personal use." -- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 22:56, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

@The Hammer of Thor: I'm fine implementing this change, but for the record, the wording came from the Cannabis article's lead. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 23:49, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks @Another Believer: A wish that I have for an outcome of this project is that we find and repair as much as we can of the non-neutral, biased content, that is all too common here. -- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 03:25, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Just noticed this part of the conversation and agree that "recreational" grates on me as POV. I have used the term "non-medical use" in some articles related to legislation in the past, but this works as well. - Bri (talk) 21:04, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Recreational vs adult use

@Dennis Brown: Regarding [1], your attention called to this conversation as a courtesy. We can work on RSes but FYI the title of the California initiative was Adult Use of Marijuana Act for this reason. Small's book referred to elsewhere on this page uses "nonmedical drug use" for a chapter title [2]. I think we should be careful with words, for many reasons including this: new religions using cannabis can't be characterized as recreation. - Bri (talk) 20:50, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

There are many, many, many sources that use "recreational". Before you go changing anything, I think you need a long, 30 day RFC and we should be consistent across the Wiki. I would advertise this (neutrally) at the village pump and other places. It is one thing to get people to agree on something on one article, but really this needs wiki-wide consensus because there is too much evidence that "recreational" is in fact the WP:COMMONNAME for what you are talking about. I honestly don't care either way, I just want us to follow the sources and policy. Until such an RFC takes place and a consensus forms to say otherwise, I'm forced to continue to maintain the status quo of "recreational". It isn't about personal opinion (and accordingly, it should never be) it is about policy. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 23:07, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

• Let me also add that being "politically charged" is an invalid reason to not use the phrase. Again, we follow the sources. It is NOT our job to change the hearts and minds of people, nor to change the lingo used within cannabis culture. Our job is solely to document facts and back it with reliable sources. Anything more than this is advocacy and that is not allowed. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 23:09, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Dennis, I think we have here an example of a legitimate tension between two imperatives. Follow the sources (numerically) and use POV terminology, or use NPOV terminology even if it is not used by the majority of the sources? Your reply led off with "there are many, many sources" that use one language form but isn't that an oversimplification that ignores this issue? Bri (talk) 02:04, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

It is policy. You follow the sources first. I don't think "recreational" is an NPOV problem because if you are talking non-medical use, it is descriptive. Most sources break it down between use as medicine and recreational use as an intoxicant. What other uses are there for the dried herb? How is "recreational" non-neutral? We have recreational vehicles, recreational time, etc. The fact that California is using "adult use" in a proposition is meaningless outside that one article. The rest of the sources still use "recreational". It is our job to use the same titles as virtually all newspapers, books and television shows. Keep in mind, that might change, just as we shifted from using marijuana all the time to using the term cannabis much of the time. Until that day, we don't really have a choice. This is a huge topic with lots of articles. You can't have some articles say one thing, and other articles say another, so a shift in this way is a big deal, which is why it would take an RFC. I think you want to change how others view non-medical cannabis, which is a bias issue. Not a character flaw, mind you, but it is a bias issue and you have to set that aside. I don't think the community as a whole is going to accept this is an NPOV issue, nor that most sources are still using this, but you are welcome to start a neutral RFC and see. I can help with the wording if needed, it should be simple with no opinions. I think you are a few years too early, however. The one CA proposition isn't going to overcome decades of newspaper articles using the term. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 09:46, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

Of course there are POV issues when using the term recreational because, think about it, would you ever use the phrase "recreational alcohol" or "recreational drinking"? No. -- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 14:31, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

That doesn't make it POV. Recreational is used to differentiate from medical use. "Recreation" isn't a negative word, nor do I (and the majority of Americans) consider the recreational use of cannabis as offensive. You would have to convince the majority of participants in an RFC that "recreational" is offensive or biased in some way, enough so to overcome the fact that the overwhelming majority of sources use it. If you aren't using it as medicine, it is used for pleasure (ie: recreation) so the phrase is not inherently non-neutral. Again, you can start an RFC but I wouldn't hold my breath as the number of sources using this phrase is again, overwhelming. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 15:45, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

You're describing social use or responsible use or personal use. -- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 15:46, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

That is your opinion and original research. I'm describing exactly what the sources use, which exactly what we are supposed to do here, by policy. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 19:16, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

My statements of fact are unbiased and neutral. It is your opinion that the phrase "recreational use" is inoffensive. What matters is not how many sources use the term, but the fact that there are no sources to back up your claim that the phrase is unbiased. -- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 20:35, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

Have an RFC. That is the simple cure. The sources all use the phrase, so my assumption is based on the fact that ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox and other outlets are probably not doing it to offend. You are the one with the unusual claim that somehow, now, it is offensive. I'm saying use the sources. You saying "What matters is not how many sources use the term" shows you have no idea how Wikipedia works. I'm pretty sure I know how it works. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 22:33, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

Times do change. There was a time when women were the property of their husbands. And sources often used terms of ownership. But when times change, as unbiased editors it is our job to change along with the times. -- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 21:19, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

Then start an RFC. If I see it, I will revert and drag to WP:DRN if needed as it is a long established and well sourced term. Not going to argue about it anymore. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 22:13, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

Wow, this is profoundly uncool. What if I told The Hammer of Thor to go ahead and make what edits he prefers and I'll revert those who take opposite opinions and escalate to DRN? Doesn't sound so good, does it. But does which actor have the admin bit really matter in that scenario? We are supposed to reach consensus not threaten. Bri (talk) 23:03, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

• No, you are wasting time. If you want to reach a *new* consensus, then start an RFC. I'm tired of repeating myself. This isn't an admin issue, it is a content issue. Once he said he didn't care how many sources used the phrase, I knew I was talking to someone who was clueless on how we find consensus. Uncool or not, this is how dispute resolution works. Now again, I'm not going to argue. I know what the policy is, what mechanisms exist, and of course I will stay in policy and use those mechanisms when one or two people are wanting to go against consensus and sources. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 00:08, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

Please don't quote me, out of context. I wrote: "What matters is ... there are no sources to back up your claim." And please, stop name-calling. I'm offended. That's inappropriate! -- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 17:54, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

Did you know queue

"Did you know?" is a program on Wikipedia to promote recently developed articles which meet certain standards. If anyone wishes to participate in that program for this 420 project, develop any cannabis related Wikipedia article by the end of March. Nominate the article at DYK, then list it at Template_talk:Did_you_know#Special_occasion_holding_area for April 20, which is the 420 holiday. Let's see what happens. Perhaps we can have a few cannabis related articles particularly promoted on that day. Blue Rasberry (talk) 12:18, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Press

Thanks to User:Bluerasberry for adding a new "Press" section, starting with this Ganjapreneur article. We've made a couple messaging changes since this was published, but I'm glad to see interest building already. Let's all be on the lookout for additional press coverage! I've mentioned this article on the Signpost suggestions page for inclusion in the "In the news" roundup. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 20:03, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Update: I added a YesWeSkunk.com link and also see the campaign listed in The Cannabist's "Staff: Elsewhere on the Web" sidebar. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 20:14, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

For those who are unaware, The Cannabist is an online brand of the traditional newspaper, The Denver Post. Getting noticed by them is kind of a big deal. - Brianhe (talk) 20:44, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Wow, this is exciting news! I haven't even contacted any cannabis media yet, guess they're just noticing on their own? Wonder if we can get some more formal coverage as we get closer to the date? I think it would also be good if we could make it more known that we're looking for good photos of cannabis events, dispensaries, strains, wild cannabis in different locations, etc. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 23:22, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

• Join The 4/20 Project To Boost Cannabis Knowledge On Wikipedia by Dabs magazine. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 03:30, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
• Not press, but Jeannie Herer (see Jack Herer and The Emperor Wears No Clothes ) shared about the event on Facebook, which is pretty cool: https://www.facebook.com/JeannieHerer/posts/1350741634987094. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 20:18, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
• Think You Know A Thing Or Two About Marijuana? Wikipedia Launches 420 Project: Editors wanted to 'create and improve cannabis-related content at Wikipedia.' The Fresh Toast blog by Al Olson -- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 18:25, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
• Elsharbaty, Samir; Luth, Eric (April 16, 2017). "Community digest: The UNESCO Challenge aims to help preserve World Heritage Sites; news in brief". Wikimedia Foundation. Retrieved April 16, 2017. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 01:00, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Emphasizing translation?

Not to push my own personal goals, but maybe could we have something on the page about how "if you speak a foreign language fluently, we could use you to either a) translate articles off the Redlinks list from other languages b) help translate key articles into languages where they'll be useful (ask us on the Talk page if you're not sure, tell us which language). I realize the 420 Collab is largely focused on en.wikipedia, but if for example we have some Spanish speakers show up, I could easily direct them to a number of articles that it'd be productive to translate into Spanish. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 05:50, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

Just pinging to see if anyone feels this issue is worth a section on the Collab page. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 04:23, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Barnstar?

Resolved

		420 Barnstar
		Presented in honor of contributions toward WikiProject Cannabis' 420 Collaboration. This is not a real barnstar, just a demonstration. Brianhe (talk) 00:13, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

I don't think there's a cannabis-related barnstar to award to WikiProject Cannabis and/or "420 collaboration" participants. I don't know how to create one. Does anyone know how, or is there a place where requests can be submitted? ---Another Believer _(Talk) 18:41, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

@Another Believer: I threw this together based on the Cascadia barnstar: {{420 Barnstar}}. Have at it! - Brianhe (talk) 00:13, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

@Brianhe: Sweet! Thanks! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 00:14, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Apparently we have Antonu to thank for the barnstar graphic he created back in December, 2013 at your request! It was just on the shelf waiting to be slapped into the template I created. - Brianhe (talk) 00:17, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Ah, good to know! Thanks, Antonu. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 00:19, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Hey, we need to be more liberal with this. Only two editors have received one yet ... use {{420 Barnstar}} to award! - Bri (talk) 02:35, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

List of suggested expansion topics?

In addition to our list of redlinks, what do folks think of having a list of topics for expansion, maybe with suggestions and even links to sources for how they can be expanded? I have a small personal list of material that needs to be added to articles. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 04:47, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Yes, definitely. I help out at the Teahouse. Much the biggest workload there is caused by new editors who think that the only way to contribute to Wikipedia is to create new articles (while lacking the experience to do it). I am worried by how much emphasis I see, within this cannabis project, on the creation of new articles. People (both new editors, and those managing this project) need to understand that, whenever you see a "good article", only a tiny fraction of the work that has gone into it will have been by its creator. When this project is over, most of what it has achieved will be the expansion of existing articles. Maproom (talk) 08:53, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

I want to concur with Maproom here: I think it would be good to make sure our "how to help" is really clear on ways beyond just starting new articles, especially for novice editors. I think having the Collab page more prominently feature "stubs for expansion", "articles for improvement", "translations needed", "photo/video needed" etc would be good for giving novices a way to help out besides diving blindly into new articles. Experienced editors should be fine, and will probably skip past a lot of the "how to help" materials, so I think targeting those to beginners, and clearly advising them to ask on the Collab Talk page for cannabis questions, or WP:Teahouse for general WP questions, would be advisable. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 00:01, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Here's a useful statistic: the article Cannabis has been edited 5464 times, by 2569 distinct editors. So the fine article we see now is the result of cooperation by thousands of editors, hardly any of it is the work of the original creator. In my view, when dealing with new editors, it's a mistake even to suggest the possibility of creating a new article. Maproom (talk) 07:41, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Assistance with image management requested

Discussion re: possible Weedmaps image donation

Hello. Weedmaps has expressed interest in providing images of cannabis and related topics to Wikipedia after seeing media coverage of this 420 project. To start, I uploaded 4 images in Commons:Category:Images from Weedmaps. Institutional collaborations can be a little complicated and best practices change from year to year. In setting this up I manually created a series of templates. The process is a little confusing and if anyone has any ideas for cleanup on my formatting or presentation of these images, then I would appreciate any input on how things should be. Very soon I have to go back to Weedmaps and present these images as a demo then ask if they would share more, so I want to make everything look good. Could I get comments from anyone here about my setup? Here are links to what I made- Commons:Template:Weedmaps - note that there are several subpages Commons:Category:Weedmaps Commons:Institution:Weedmaps then as I said Commons:Category:Images from Weedmaps also Commons:Category:Cannabis organizations - I think nothing like this existed before I would really appreciate feedback, even from people who glance and say it looks okay. Blue Rasberry (talk) 13:47, 28 February 2017 (UTC) It looked okay to me. I added a the "companies based in Denver" to both Wikipedia article and Commons cat and cross linked them. It's odd that it is listed as based in both Denver and O.C. so I just picked the former. Brianhe (talk) 14:14, 28 February 2017 (UTC) Why is there both "Images from Weedmaps" and "Images provided by Weedmaps"? Also, there is no page "Commons:Weedmaps", so Commons:Template:Weedmaps has a red link -- is that ok? This latter issue has been resolved. ---Another Believer (Talk) 16:04, 28 February 2017 (UTC) One is marked for deletion. Brianhe (talk) 18:10, 28 February 2017 (UTC) @Bluerasberry: Pinging just to make sure you see this. ---Another Believer (Talk) 22:26, 28 February 2017 (UTC) Also, thank you, Bluerasberry, for your work on this. How exciting to be seeing collaboration like this already! ---Another Believer (Talk) 16:06, 28 February 2017 (UTC) I accidentally made two categories. One is Commons:Category:Images from Weedmaps, which is correct. The other, "Commons:Images provided by Weedmaps", I would like deleted and purged from mention. There is another category, Commons:Category:Weedmaps, which is for miscellaneous media related to that organization but which is not provided through this project. Does that all look correct? Blue Rasberry (talk) 22:46, 28 February 2017 (UTC) Thanks for clarifying. I think all looks ok now. I'm no image expert, though, so you might consider asking someone at Commons for help if you need more specific feedback still. ---Another Believer (Talk) 22:49, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

2016 reference work

CRC Press, well known to engineers and scientists, published what I believe to be a serious, rigorous, neutral and comprehensive cannabis reference book last year. ISBN 9781498761635 is the book form, ISBN 9781315350592 is the electronic form. The former is available in Portland at University of Western States's Budden Library, according to WorldCat. The latter is available online at Google Books and could make a good reference for this project. All of its chapters are not online, but major portions are which I already plan to use. Here's a brief breakdown of the chapters:

1. Introduction
2. Prehuman and early history of Cannabis sativa
3. The ecology of wild Cannabis sativa
4. Sex expression
5. Photoperiodism
6. Shoot and foliage architecture
7. Fiber
8. Oilseed
9. Essential oil
10. Minor uses
11. Cannabis chemistry: cannabinoids in cannabis, humans and other species
12. Non-medical drug usage
13. Medical marijuana: theory and practice
14. Medical marijuana: production
15. The commercial marijuana revolution
16. Sustainability
17. Germplasm resources
18. Botanical classification and nomenclatural issues

Interestingly, they appear to use 100% or nearly 100% Wikimedia Commons images for the book. Some of us in the project may have even been contributors. - Brianhe (talk) 17:52, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

The book is

• Small, Ernest (November 2016). Cannabis: A Complete Guide. CRC Press. ISBN 978-1498761635.

and copies go for USD 85 on Amazon. Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:04, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Kind of pricey, but I have dibs on KCLS interlibrary loan! - Brianhe (talk) 00:32, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

It looks like Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney has cited this for the first time at Maltos-Cannabis. Bravo, I'm glad it was useful! - Bri (talk) 21:27, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Presentation opportunity at Wikimania in Montreal in August

Wikimania will be in Montreal in August 2017.

It is probably premature to say that certainly there should be a presentation for this project but it is not premature to start thinking about how this project ranks in relative impact. It could be the case, for example, that more traffic comes to cannabis related articles than many other targets of outreach, and it could be worthwhile to develop some plan for broader conversation about this.

I was looking at the plan for a special, full-day session on medicine at Wikimania.

• wm2017:Programme/Wiki Project Med

I do not think it would be presumptuous to say that this project could make a competitive submission for a 5-minute lighting talk at that session, if someone from WikiProject Cannabis were going to Wikimania. I edit Wikipedia articles on medicine and was thinking of this.

I wanted to float the idea that if someone was going, and they could speak to the medical importance of the project, then there is a channel for both raising some issues and also creating a recording for this project's academic contributions to the conversation. Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:01, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Great idea. I hope to go to Wikimania, but my attendance is not yet confirmed. If I am able to go, I'd be interested in discussing this further. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 22:19, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Also, this campaign should totally be considered for the annual selection of the "coolest Wikimedia projects" organized around the world! :) ---Another Believer _(Talk) 22:20, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

When do we start pinging Cannabis media?

Discussion re: cannabis media outreach

No rush, but do we have a certain timeline to ping cannabis media, and people designated to do so? Again, happy to be the person if folks like. And has anyone pinged Wikimedia Foundation to ask it there are are any particular rules we have to follow, or are we fine as long as emails to the media specify that we're individual volunteers and not speaking on behalf of WMF? Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 04:26, 1 March 2017 (UTC) Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney Do what seems natural to you. The wiki community encourages individuals to do outreach. If you hesitate for some reason you could share your outreach message here for discussion. Several of the people here already have some experience doing wiki outreach to media. Some background information about limits of what volunteers can do is at wmf:Trademark policy. As you say, no one should say that they represent the WMF, but also, neither the WMF nor anyone else has a unique claim to representing "Wikipedia". Anyone can say that they are part of a project to develop Wikipedia, which is what you might be doing in this case. If anyone is planning media outreach one of the first questions which comes up is "Does Wikipedia matter?" A good way to be ready to talk about that is to have a traffic report. I do not quite know how to calculate this. We could get a list of all cannabis articles from Category:Cannabis and put it into Massviews for 2016. Then we could say, "In 2016 English Wikipedia articles on cannabis had 99999999 pageviews. Wikipedia matters because it is the single most consulted source of information on cannabis..." which is a provocative statement because it leaves everyone else in the world to check their own viewership numbers and think about Wikipedia's reach. Or - you might have your own ideas about contacting media. I do recommend having an agenda for the conversation before contacting them so that you can both prompt anyone if they need the push and also so that you can direct the conversation in a way of your own choosing rather than leave it to another person to decide. Who in cannabis media would you contact? What would you say? What do you think the schedule should be? I might help craft some talking points. It might be helpful to put notes down now, because this will come up next year also and we might set general recommendations so that anyone can do this. Blue Rasberry (talk) 13:34, 1 March 2017 (UTC) @Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney: Great question. I was definitely waiting until at least March to do any outreach. Now that March has arrived, I'm glad you started this discussion. You are welcome to reach out to media whenever you want, keeping in mind the 420 collaboration is not until the second half of April. Some media may prefer to know well in advance so they can promote the event in different ways, and with time to dedicate to promoting outside events before they may focus on their own 4/20 activities. If you do reach out to media or organizations, do please share here so we aren't overlapping efforts and stepping on one another's toes. As for WMF, I will send an email to a couple folks who I think can help. ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:38, 1 March 2017 (UTC) Update: I sent a message to two WMFers, informing them of our plans and requesting feedback if they have any questions, concerns, or recommendations. @Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney: Feel free to create a list of orgs you'd like to contact, or use the "checklist" at the top of this page to keep us apprised of your actions. ---Another Believer (Talk) 16:49, 1 March 2017 (UTC) This might seem too lighthearted for the trade associations, but who knows. A well produced media kit would probably help. Here are a few of them. Pardon, moved list below - GLM At the least we could ask for media donations of industrial fiber growing and industrial processes (fiber and oil and so forth). - Brianhe (talk) 17:46, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Folks to contact with Press Release

Extended content

Trade associations  Done European Industrial Hemp Association (Germany based)  Not done Hemp Industries Association (U.S.) requires login  Done International Hemp Association (Netherlands)  Done Canadian Hemp Trade Alliance (Canada)  Done Victoria, Australia, NSW, Western Australia (Australia) Cannabis media  Done The Cannabist (Denver Post)  Done High Times  Done MJ Biz Daily  Done MerryJane.com  Done Reason Foundation and magazine Cannabis NGOs/advocates  Done NORML  Done NORML New Zealand  Done Marijuana Policy Project  Done LEAP  Done Cato Institute  Done Marijuana Majority  Done DC Cannabis Campaign  Done Smart Approaches to Marijuana (so we're including anti-cannabis orgs to be fair) Cannabis businesses Singling out those that have an active informational and/or social media face  Done Sensi Seeds  Done Leafly  Done Weedmaps Cannabis museums  Not done Cannabis Museum, Japan not sure how to reach  Done Cannabis Museum, New Zealand  Not done Hash Museum (Spain/Netherlands not sure how to reach  Done Hanfmuseum (Berlin)  Done Cannabis Museum (Uruguay) Cannabis political parties  Done Cannabis Party (New Zealand)

Draft of Press Release

See also: Wikipedia:WikiProject Cannabis/420 Collaboration Press Release Draft

Discussion re: draft press release

In keeping with WP mentality, I'm starting a Press Release draft at Wikipedia:WikiProject Cannabis/420 Collaboration Press Release Draft, so we can all take a stab at it, and when it's ready we can divvy up who's pinging what org when, and cast a pretty wide net to include major cannabis media, smaller blogs, advocacy groups, etc. No reason not to give a lot of folks a shout and see what shakes out. Let's try to write the PR in a way that makes it clear and unconfusing for non-Wiki folks, and makes the Collab sound fun and inviting! Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 04:09, 5 March 2017 (UTC) Shall we set a hard deadline to finalize the PR and disseminate? 15 March perhaps, or anyone propose another date? AB, has WMF said anything to your inquiries? Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 03:09, 6 March 2017 (UTC) @Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney: I reached out to the Communications team, who did not express any concerns, but said we should contact the PR team if we need advice on legal issues and image/public perception. I don't really see a need for this -- we aren't in any way saying that WMF endorses our efforts, and my concern was mostly just giving the Communications team a heads up about the project and asking they consider ways to promote the campaign online if they were interested. You or other participants are welcome to contact the PR team if you feel the need, but I feel comfortable moving forward without seeking counsel from WMF's PR team. ---Another Believer (Talk) 20:51, 6 March 2017 (UTC) The Communications team also said they were open to publishing a WMF guest blog post about the campaign, if we are interested in submitting a draft. I started a section about this below. ---Another Believer (Talk) 20:52, 6 March 2017 (UTC) When do folks want to launch the Press Release? Any more touch-ups to make before we do so? Anyone else want to help email it out, or shall I just raise my hand for it? Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 00:56, 18 March 2017 (UTC) @Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney: I am comfortable with you distributing the release to whomever you deem appropriate. Maybe keep us updated with who you contact and whether or not you get any noteworthy responses? I'm more comfortable helping to run the campaign than conducting outreach, so thanks for taking the initiative here. Anyone else have thoughts? ---Another Believer (Talk) 01:17, 18 March 2017 (UTC) @Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney: Do you want to include any of the following links in the release so show how other outlets are already starting to pick this up. Might pique interest more if people see others have also publicized. Not required, just a thought: Branfalt, TG (January 25, 2017). "Wikipedia Planning for Huge Cannabis Content Collaboration in April". Ganjapreneur.com. "Would you like to contribute cannabis information to Wikipedia?". YesWeSkunk.com. January 27, 2017. "Join the 4/20 Project to Boost Cannabis Knowledge on Wikipedia". Dabs Magazine. February 1, 2017. ---Another Believer (Talk) 01:18, 18 March 2017 (UTC) Same. Bri (talk) 14:33, 18 March 2017 (UTC) I'm pretty packed until at soonest this coming weekend, shall I aim to send out the Press Release in the last days of March or first days of April (not the 1st of course)? If I take this bullet, are there other folks that can do the WMF blog piece, and can other folks divvy up sending the invites to the other WikiProjects? I'm happy to sign up for some stuff, I just don't want to overload my plate. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 20:29, 19 March 2017 (UTC) Yes, don't overload yourself. I still plan on distributing WikiProject invitations, likely in early April (?), and tinkering with a WMF blog draft. ---Another Believer (Talk) 20:49, 19 March 2017 (UTC) I just sent snail-mail (template) to an up-and-coming Weedtuber from the Pacific Northwest. It had a copy of the three bulleted goals from the project page, and a bit of explanation. Perhaps she will mention the project on her show. - Bri (talk) 22:26, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

Anyone active on Twitter?

Anyone have a non-sensitive Twitter account who can help blast out the Press Release to active cannabis folks on Twitter to spread it? Thinking Willy Nelson, Snoop Dog, Woody Harrelson, folks like that with lots of followers who can broadcast the invite? Anyone game? Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 19:41, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

I can't be of any help here, unfortunately. I don't deal with Twitter. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 22:23, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Me neither, but if anyone here can ping anyone who is Twitter-active, it'd be pretty cool to spread some awareness. I pinged some friends off-wiki asking to help spread the news. Am I mistaken or has someone already proposed a Twitter hashtag for the collab somewhere? Maybe we can add that to the main Collab page? Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 20:19, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

WMF blog

See also: Wikipedia:WikiProject Cannabis/Proposed WMF draft

Related to the above section, I wonder if anyone is interested in possibly writing a guest WMF blog post. I'm not sure they'd be willing to publish, but we could ask. (?) I could see the following layout: introduction of the upcoming 420 collaboration, including an explanation of "420" and the significance of April 20; introduction to WikiProject Cannabis; outline the goals of the upcoming collaboration and how we are prioritizing neutrality; invite people to contribute to the campaign, regardless of their opinions about cannabis; etc. Just thinking out loud here... ---Another Believer _(Talk) 00:27, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Do you have any examples of past WMF posts that we can take inspiration from? I imagine it's meant to be more narrative/engaging and not too dry? I'll start a draft here just with a few basic points: Wikipedia:WikiProject Cannabis/Proposed WMF draft. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 01:13, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

I'm sure there are much better examples, but here is one I co-wrote in 2015 about the Wiki Loves Pride campaign, which seeks to create and improve LGBT-related content. Here's another I wrote the following year on the same subject. Again, you're probably better off browsing the WMF blog or this guide at Meta-Wiki, but at least these examples show the general structure and style of a guest WMF blog about a content creation project. I hope this helps. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 03:44, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Most-read articles

Extended content

I added a link at the CP Cann. metrics section for a report of the most-read articles. For the months of January–February 2017, the articles with over 100,000 views total are : Bob Marley Woody Harrelson Cannabis (drug) Amsterdam Carl Sagan Colorado Cannabis Denver Rastafari Legality of cannabis by country 420 (cannabis culture) Cannabidiol Hemp Tetrahydrocannabinol Mexican Drug War Controlled Substances Act Hashish Weeds (TV series) War on Drugs I suspect that some of the redlinks or drafts like Draft:Weedtuber might make this list quickly, when they become articles. Another observation: the presence of charas and bhang indicate perhaps we have more Indian readers that I would have guessed. - Bri (talk) 21:31, 7 March 2017 (UTC) Thanks for sharing. ---Another Believer (Talk) 22:27, 7 March 2017 (UTC) This isn't all-inclusive, right? Cannabis (drug) has more monthly page views than Rastafari. Good point on the India issue though, really larger readership over there. IIRC the page Cannabis in India gets more page-views than the cannabis pages for any country except the US, Canada (which is running neck-and-neck with US these days), UK, and Australia. It was also majority written by WikiProject India editors after I posted an invite there a couple years ago. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 03:35, 8 March 2017 (UTC) Uh oh, you might be right ... glitch in sorting? I'll do it over. - Bri (talk) 04:07, 8 March 2017 (UTC) When I ran your link, it counted down in order for most of the list, but then toward the end there were a bunch of articles (both high and low views) in no particular order. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 04:10, 8 March 2017 (UTC) Sure enough I fouled it up. Not sure if it was my error or the sorting script on the page. Anyway now I have copied the entire output and formatted as sortable table Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cannabis/2017 pageviews. Updated list of top articles above. - Bri (talk) 04:33, 8 March 2017 (UTC) Looking closer, Cannabis in India is running neck-and-neck with Cannabis in Australia; also Chillum (pipe) is another India-focused cannabis article with over 10k views/month. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 04:37, 8 March 2017 (UTC) I also looked again, and here's an interesting trend. The pageviews of the "Cannabis by <country/state/province>" series runs nearly according to the size of the English speaking population. For the states and provinces I've assumed 100% English speaking population to first order approximation. The first several from most viewed to least. the United States 251M speakers Canada 57M California 39M the United Kingdom 59M Australia 17M India 100M?? Colorado 5M Mass 6.7M British Columbia 4.6M Obviously India is an anomaly, with something like 100 million people with some English facility. Perhaps one can conclude that the number of people with technical and language access to English Wikipedia is somewhere between 5 and 17 million?? Another observation, specific strains don't seem to be very popular reading. Unless I'm mistaken, the first one is Acapulco Gold (cannabis) with about 5,000 views for the first two months of the year. Way below Hempcrete and other stuff I thought wouldn't be so interesting to readers. Maybe people are getting their strain info somewhere else on the web. - Bri (talk) 05:05, 8 March 2017 (UTC) Re strains, I think a lot of strain information is very anecdotal, and/or falls more in the category of "product reviews" or "how to", neither of which are Wikipedia focus. So I think it makes total sense that other sites would be on blogs, forums, etc. rather than here where we're limited to encyclopedic info. Re India, I think you are probably right that some of the lower traffic of Cannabis in India might be due to a relative dearth of internet access among English speakers in India, though that's been increasing rapidly over the last decade or so (also anecdotally seeing a ton more Nigeria contributors on en.wikipedia). For other reasons it might be somewhat less-popular, the article is only a couple years old so hasn't had as long to get branched into and linked from other places on the web. And also, purely speculation on my part, a lot of Indians might not think of ganja in the same sense as "that marijuana drug" so might be much more inclined to search bhang, charas, etc. (which you'll note are highly-read articles) rather than thinking of "cannabis in India" as a root concept. Note also, despite the US having six times the population of Canada, their main articles are running neck-and-neck these days, presumably since Canada's planned legalization is big in the news. Though running the numbers, they've been running surprisingly close for over a year (note the Canada article had some title swap-arounds), other than the massive spike during the US elections: Pageviews link (Pageview link showing post-Election and name-swaps. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 00:03, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

Invitation to Talk page (clear for novices) at top of Collab page?

Since we might be getting an influx (tiny or huge) of novice editors, could we have some easy-to-see notice at the top of the Collab page with something like "Don't know where to start, come introduce yourself on the Talk page and we'll help you get started!" Just something so that people totally unfamiliar with Wikipedia, who might be overwhelmed scrolling through a big page of links and guidelines, can come to us to get hands-on help?

Also, should we have something about WP:Teahouse to send folks there for general mentorship, or just keep them here and if we get a ton of questions we can post at Teahouse asking for volunteers to drop in to help us out?

Again we have no idea if this Collab is going to be dozens of outside editors and a hundred novices dropping in (and scores of IPs wandering around trying to be helpful) or if it's going to be pretty much just us and a handful of folks from the other Wikiprojects who drop in, so just wanting to make sure we're ready in case it's bigger than expected. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 20:36, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Bumping topic, anyone have an opinion or opposition or should I just gin up a "confused? ask us on the Talk page" banner? Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 03:50, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

I think you put your finger on the conundrum : we don't know if it will be big or small turnout. Maybe make a small effort for now and we can beef it up if necessary. - Bri (talk) 03:54, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Draft WikiProject invitation

You are invited to participate in the upcoming "420 collaboration", which is being held from Saturday, April 15 to Sunday, April 30, and especially on April 20, 2017! The purpose of the collaboration, which is being organized by WikiProject Cannabis, is to create and improve cannabis-related content at Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects in a variety of fields, including: culture, health, hemp, history, medicine, politics, and religion. WikiProject Agriculture participants may be particularly interested in the following categories: Category:Cannabis cultivation and Category:Hemp. For more information about this campaign, and to learn how you can help improve Wikipedia, please visit the "420 collaboration" page.

How do folks feel about using the above template as a WikiProject invitation? The suggested articles/categories can be updated depending on the WikiProject. Any suggested changes before we start distributing WikiProject invites? ---Another Believer _(Talk) 15:04, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

@Bri, Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney, and The Hammer of Thor: Pinging a few organizers for feedback, thanks! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 15:22, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

@Bri, Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney, The Hammer of Thor, and Bluerasberry: Pinging one more time. I'll probably start distributing these to talk pages next week. Any concerns or suggestions before then? ---Another Believer _(Talk) 22:49, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Nice. -- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 02:49, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

 Doing... I am in the process of posting WikiProject invitations. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:38, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

 Done I have submitted invitations to all of the WikiProjects listed on the project page. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 15:15, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Notes

• the invitation at WikiProject Albums was removed by User:Walter Görlitz (and again by User:Ojorojo)
  • I won't post a follow-up. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 21:23, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
• the invitation at WikiProject Conservatism was archived immediately by User:Chris troutman
  • I posted a follow-up message, in case it was the template that was bothersome. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 21:23, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
• the invitation at WikiProject Songs was immediately removed by User:Walter Görlitz, who then left this message on my talk page (which he edited)
  • I posted this message on his talk page, saying it is a disservice to prevent WikiProject Songs participants from being able to contribute to the 85 entries in Category:Songs about cannabis, or create new articles. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 20:56, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
  • .... which evidently made him sigh. *sigh* ---Another Believer _(Talk) 21:22, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:59, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

• User:Walter Görlitz reverted the invitation I posted at WikiProject Vancouver. In turn, I reverted his revert because I see no reason for him to decide who can and cannot view this invitation and participate. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 13:45, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Discussion re: WikiProject invitation reverts by User:Davey2010

User:Davey2010 just reverted the invitations posted to WikiProject Bolivia, England, Houston, and Missing encyclopedia articles. I don't have the energy to push back on this, even though I think it's rude. ---Another Believer (Talk) 16:00, 14 April 2017 (UTC) ... and Austin and Boston and Chicago and New Orleans. These invitations specific specific content WikiProject editors can help improve, and the campaign only lasts 2 weeks. I don't know why the invitations cannot be display until the campaign is over. @Davey2010: I wish you would reconsider your reverts. ---Another Believer (Talk) 16:02, 14 April 2017 (UTC) As I said stop spamming this shit everywhere - If people want to join then they'll join via the Wikiprojects home page. –Davey2010Talk 16:02, 14 April 2017 (UTC) @Davey2010: I am just trying to make people aware of the campaign and inviting them to support the campaign by focusing on specific articles and categories to improve. It's not "shit". ---Another Believer (Talk) 16:03, 14 April 2017 (UTC) And that's great however we don't allow editors to post their wikiproject invites on talkpages especially on those that are unrelated, Had you posted this on various medicine related wikiprojects then I wouldn't mind but for instance this doesn't relate to Wikiproject:England etc etc, There's means and ways of doing things and your way unfortunately isn't one of them, Thanks. –Davey2010Talk 16:05, 14 April 2017 (UTC) @Davey2010: The invitation posted to WikiProject England invited editors to improve Cannabis in the United Kingdom and entries in Category:Cannabis in the United Kingdom. How is this unrelated or inappropriate? ---Another Believer (Talk) 16:07, 14 April 2017 (UTC) Because it's spam, I would be the exact same if it was any other wikiproject, By all means post on various medicine wikiprojects or topics that are actually related to this, Happy editing. –Davey2010Talk 16:12, 14 April 2017 (UTC) ... and Canadian law, Festivals, Georgia (U.S. state), Holidays, Illinois, Miami, Tampa Bay, United State Public Policy, and Vancouver... So much for recruiting participation. Sorry, folks, I tried! ---Another Believer (Talk) 16:05, 14 April 2017 (UTC) @Uanfala: Thanks for pushing back at Missing encyclopedia articles. I don't think it's fair to call these invitations unrelated to where they are being posted. ---Another Believer (Talk) 16:46, 14 April 2017 (UTC) The post on WP Missing Articles looked appropriate, while the relevance for the various country/state projects is in my opinion very weak. – Uanfala (talk) 16:50, 14 April 2017 (UTC) Thanks for reverting Uanfala, FWIW I agree the wikiproject is related to the missing articles wikiproject so should be added, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 20:23, 14 April 2017 (UTC) I think the country invites are appropriate in that they specifically encourage working on cannabis related articles for each country ie Cannabis in Somalia to the Somalia project. AusLondonder (talk) 01:03, 15 April 2017 (UTC) Well, I just logged on to see 99+ notifications, alerting me that my WikiProject invitations were reverted. I'll just go ahead and assume they have all been removed, or most of them. This means I wasted a ton of time compiling lists of projects, collecting articles and categories for their members to improve, and distributing invites. I'm quite disappointed in User:Davey2010's actions, and in the potential loss of collaboration, but at least this campaign can say we tried. ---Another Believer (Talk) 01:03, 15 April 2017 (UTC) See below: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Cannabis/420_Collaboration#Wikiprojects. ---Another Believer (Talk) 01:09, 15 April 2017 (UTC) Perhaps had you got consensus for them all we wouldn't be here now. –Davey2010Talk 01:09, 15 April 2017 (UTC) I'm not commenting on this any further. I can't change your mind, so I'm just going to let consensus run its course. ---Another Believer (Talk) 01:12, 15 April 2017 (UTC) Davey2010 has behaved absolutely disgustingly removing invites from projects even after numerous editors asked him to stop at his talkpage. He has violated WP:3RR. AusLondonder (talk) 01:20, 15 April 2017 (UTC) Update: Davey2010 has restored the invitations. See the section below for more info, thanks! ---Another Believer (Talk) 02:52, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Pageviews

Pageviews of the project page are way up, probably due to the invites. Yesterday the 420 subpage had approx 9x its average views. - Bri (talk) 15:27, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Like I just posted a lot more, so hopefully there will be even more traffic soon. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 15:50, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

As predicted, pageviews are up again. Last three days were 4, then 88, then 150. Good job publicizing it internally. - Bri (talk) 17:52, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

I also requested a mention in The Signpost, but I realized today the last newsletter was sent in late February, so I have no idea what's going on over there. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:56, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Just a quick update, views were up to 414 on April 15, probably associated with the project's kickoff and the newest invites. - Bri (talk) 17:32, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Happy news

Hopefully an antidote to the rancor of earlier in the day. The press source that was just added included a link to the project invitation and added these words of their own, indicating that they got the content message loud and clear. "As is clear from the invitation, this is not the forum for aficionados to pontificate on why the color orange is much brighter after toking on a joint of Mango Kush. Nor is it an invitation for you to tell the story about that time your Aunt Midge ate a marijuana-laced brownie and thought she was a pole dancer." - Bri (talk) 18:35, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Indeed! Too bad some of the regular editors I've encountered the past couple days didn't seem to agree ... ---Another Believer _(Talk) 19:01, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia outage on 19 April 2017

On Wednesday, 19 April 2017, starting at 14:00 UTC (9am in Portland, noon in New York, 3pm in London, 7:30pm in India) for about 30 minutes Wikipedia will be in read-only mode and no Wikipedia editing will be possible. There is more information at m:Tech/Server switch 2017. Anyone who wants more information should check there or, if you like, contact Whatamidoing (WMF) who is the messenger sharing this information.

Obviously the downtime was scheduled at this day and time because The Man at the The Establishment is getting scared of WikiProject Cannabis's momentum. However, we are not going to let this harsh the mellow of 420 participants or disrupt cannabis-related edits during the most important editing event of the year. Instead we are going to be cool and use this downtime to get in tune with the universe, re-sync our efforts, stay groovy, and edit more before and after the outage. Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:47, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

Like Thanks for the heads up! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 21:26, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

If I understand the notice correctly, they are switching to a redundant server for a week two weeks. So there is a chance that it will not go smoothly and editing will be disrupted during our peak day. My mellow is harshed just thinking about it. Also, tangentally, Willie Nelson's birthday is during our event on April 29; we should try to do something special around that. - Bri (talk) 15:41, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Major bummer, and unfortunate timing. Too bad the inaugural campaign will be affected by something out of our control, but at least we're getting the ball rolling... ---Another Believer _(Talk) 15:51, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Draft WMF blog post at Meta-Wiki

Discussion re: proposed draft

I drafted a WMF blog post here. Do any other organizers have any edits, suggestions, concerns? Does anyone else want to be included as a guest author? ---Another Believer (Talk) 19:11, 6 April 2017 (UTC) @Bri, Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney, and The Hammer of Thor: Pinging you three specifically, and also wondering if any of you may have feedback regarding the draft WikiProject invitation posted above. Thanks! ---Another Believer (Talk) 19:11, 6 April 2017 (UTC) @Bluerasberry: Pinging you as well in case you have any feedback or concerns. ---Another Believer (Talk) 19:24, 6 April 2017 (UTC) It looks good. ... Except maybe could benefit from a briefer title. ... I'm not sure how much help I will be, but I'm certainly very happy to be added as a co-author. -- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 22:15, 6 April 2017 (UTC) @The Hammer of Thor: OK, thanks, I added you as a co-author. I am assuming the WMF communications team will let me/us know if the title is too long, or if they have any other concerns about the draft. For all I know, they won't have any interest in publishing something of this sort. ---Another Believer (Talk) 22:51, 6 April 2017 (UTC) Generally good. There's something bothering me about "some nations have legalized cannabis..." in the context of non-unitary governments such as the U.S. but I don't have a suggestion for improvement at this time. - Bri (talk) 22:46, 6 April 2017 (UTC) @Bri: OK, thanks. I am not sure of a better alternative either, so I will leave for now. I won't add you as a co-author, unless you're interested. Thanks again! ---Another Believer (Talk) 22:53, 6 April 2017 (UTC) Sometimes content in Wikimedia projects has a way of persisting longer and going beyond the English speaking world in ways that the original authors did not imagine. I edited the text to remove contemporary pop culture references, and also to avoid requiring the reader to have awareness of US geography to fully appreciate the statement. Blue Rasberry (talk) 12:48, 7 April 2017 (UTC) I removed the text about Weedmaps. I do not think this partnership is going to work out this year. Blue Rasberry (talk) 12:52, 7 April 2017 (UTC) Thanks! ---Another Believer (Talk) 22:24, 10 April 2017 (UTC) Update: So, I heard back from the blog team, who said the proposed blog draft has been converted into a community digest post. I don't know exactly what this is, but I appreciate any posting on the WMF website, really. I will share a link once posted. ---Another Believer (Talk) 17:25, 11 April 2017 (UTC) Very cool. Here's a list to the community digest posts: https://blog.wikimedia.org/c/communications/community-digest/. It appears to be near-weekly. - Bri (talk) 17:52, 11 April 2017 (UTC) Thanks! I'll keep an eye out for the update. ---Another Believer (Talk) 18:04, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Manual of style for 420

Every time someone writes "420", do we want to set the example that this should be in quotation marks? Maybe we do and maybe not, but we might be setting an example here for what we want others to do. Blue Rasberry (talk) 13:02, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Title?

I think this project needs a title. Various places in various texts call the project by these names:

• 420 Collaboration
• "420" Collaboration
• 420 collaboration
• "420" collaboration

I think that whatever the case, this project should have a clear name which could be referenced by other media. Ideally it could be a name which could appear in hashtags or other media outlets and be something which could be found with Internet search. "420 Collaboration" is what I think the working name has been. "420collaboration" works as a keyword and hashtag. "420wiki" makes sense also.

Could others weigh in about whether this project should have a more clearly defined name, and if so, what it should be? I can understand why now might not be the time to name the project also. Blue Rasberry (talk) 13:02, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Yes, I agree, there is no need to put quotation marks around 420. When referring to the campaign, I propose "420 Collaboration" or "420 collaboration". ---Another Believer _(Talk) 14:40, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

How or why '420' at all?

I could not find where the number 420 is from. Should not this clarification be in top of a PR campaign? Three clicks is a long distance. And clearly not enough, for me ;-). -DePiep (talk) 19:44, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

420 (cannabis culture) explains it. Bri (talk) 20:02, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Tie-in with Canadian legalization?

According to a CBC story breaking today, it looks like the timing of a Canadian legalization bill (we may need a new article for the bill) is favorable for this project. - Bri (talk) 17:34, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Like ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:39, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

This story (Seattle P-I via San Francisco Chronicle) specifically mentions the timing vis-a-vis 420 day. - Bri (talk) 16:43, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Created Draft:2017 Canada cannabis legalization and will add to the work list. - Bri (talk) 18:15, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

3 days!

Alright, we start in 3 days! Hopefully the WMF digest piece will be published soon, and it'd be nice if a few more cannabis outlets covered our efforts, but regardless, I am looking forward to creating and improving as many articles as possible during the next 2 weeks. Let's do this! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 18:06, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Now! -- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 00:20, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

YES, let's do this! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 01:14, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Other ways to improve articles

Here are some other ways to improve Wikipedia articles:

• If you see an article that needs a copy edit, consider submitting a request from the Guild of Copy Editors (you may have up to 3 open requests).
• If you believe an article meets Good article criteria, consider nominating it for Good article status.
• Reach out to WikiProjects related to missing articles to see if they'd be willing to help out. For example, I posted on the talk page of WikiProject Cuba to see if anyone was interested in creating an article for Cannabis in Cuba. I did the same for WikiProject Bolivia. (This is different from a WikiProject invitation; these were sent to projects to assist with expanding one or more existing articles.) You can find a list of missing articles here.
• Keep an eye on the list of red links. Remove created articles and consider adding more red links to the list.
• If you see individual editors who may be interested in participating, based on their edits to cannabis-related articles, feel free to invite them to join!

Feel free to add to this list or share updates. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 04:59, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Does anyone object to me going to the "Village Pump" equivalent for French, Spanish, Portuguese, and Catalan Wikipedias and posting a notice about the 420 Collab? Anyone else want to cover that for any other-language wikis they're active on? Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 05:30, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

@Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney: I don't object, but I'm done trying to post invitations and recruit participation on-wiki (see the "Notes" subsection above for more info). ---Another Believer _(Talk) 16:29, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

I was informed that this is "an outreach". Nonsense. It's proselytizing for a position. No other projects solicit like this. Please stop trying to draw attention to this project's goal. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:32, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

@Walter Görlitz: The project page explicitly states that there is no pro/con position, "We have no political agenda. We are not activists advocating for legalization." Our worklist has tons of articles on legitimate neutral topics regarding agriculture, history and so forth. Your claim that other projects don't do exactly the same outreach is flatly false; see Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:US50_Invite. It's unfortunate that you've decided to make this an issue. - Bri (talk) 17:49, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Immaterial. You're pushing your project to other projects for visibility. That makes your claims of innocence pointedly false. You should have gone to the village pump, sought consensus there and commissioned a bot to do this. Don't ping me again. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:53, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

I've gone to the Village Pump-equivalent in French, Spanish, Catalan, and Italian to invite folks here. @Bri:, can you do the same for German? Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 17:57, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Oh boy, you're putting my high school German to the test. German Wikipedia's village pump organization (Projektdiskussion, natürlich) is a bit different. I dropped a note at the inter-projects noticeboard: de:Wikipedia:Tellerrand#420 Collaboration on English Wikipedia. - Bri (talk) 18:40, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Where is the discussion at the English village pump? Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:43, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Is this page also for questions from collab editors, or just for people running the collab?

Do we need to set up a separate talk page about working in the collab, somewhere where non-cannabis editors and any newbies can ask "how can I help? what about this idea?" or is this talk page multi-use? Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 20:21, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

I'd say this talk page serves many purposes, and vote for keeping discussions focused here. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 21:10, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

I've collapsed a few sections to make the page easier to navigate. Feel free to do more of this if you feel some sections are resolved. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 22:42, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Wikiprojects

Discussion re: User:Davey2010 and WikiProject invitations

See also: User_talk:Davey2010 § Removing_others.27_talk_page_comments Hi, I've removed this from over 200 unrelated wikiprojects because IMHO this is unrelated to them all, If anyone wants to get consensus for these I'd be more than happy to add each and every one back however as it stands there was no consensus and 2 or 3 people at present disagree with these, Also I apologise Another Believer for the amount of notifications you've received, Also pinging Nihonjoe and [[User:}AusLondonder|}AusLondonder]] who disagreed with the removal on my tp, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 01:03, 15 April 2017 (UTC) @Davey2010: You need to stop your removal now. Multiple editors have expressed concern about it, yet you continue to remove the posts without any consensus. Please stop now or your editing to remove the notice will be considered disruptive, and further actions may be necessary. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 01:04, 15 April 2017 (UTC) Wrong - there was no consensus for these in the first place, But yes I have stopped for now. –Davey2010Talk 01:06, 15 April 2017 (UTC) @Davey2010: Consensus doesn't have to be obtained for every action, even one like this. The proper course of action for you would have been to express your concern on the appropriate talk page or at the editor's talk page. If you failed to come to an agreement, then follow the steps at WP:DISPUTE and take the discussion at the appropriate venue. Unilaterally imposing your opinion on everyone is not the way to do things when you disagree with the actions of another. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 01:10, 15 April 2017 (UTC) I did what I was best which was to remove this from the irrelevent projects (There's alot I've still left so they've not been removed from everywhere), Either way the editor should've got consensus before mass-spamming and as I have said if consensus at a relevent board is to allow these then I'll add them all back. –Davey2010Talk 01:13, 15 April 2017 (UTC) @Davey2010: You've got it backward: you're the one disagreeing with everyone else. Was the notice perhaps handled poorly? Perhaps. So far, you're the only one disagreeing with it being placed on various WikiProject talk pages. I suggest that you are the one who needs to get consensus here, since you are the one disagreeing and trying to impose your view on everyone else. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 01:19, 15 April 2017 (UTC) I believe a few editors above had disagreed (Walter was one), With all due respect I'm not the one mass-adding this everywhere, Yes I'm mass-removing it and yes a few here disagree with my actions however in all honestly Believer should've got consensus for it all ... however we're going around in circles so I'm going to revert them all. –Davey2010Talk 01:23, 15 April 2017 (UTC) @Davey2010: Thank you. Despite you being unable to see why everyone was disagreeing with you, thank you for undoing all of your removals in this case. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 01:29, 15 April 2017 (UTC) Well it's either I stick to my guns, carry on reverting and essentially end up blocked or I give in and hopefully have a more peaceful life , I still believe I was right with the reverts however I begun to think as the day was going to go on more people were going to disagree so just gave in, I just wish B had got consensus first but there we are but anyway I'm reverting so hopefully we can all live a happy lives lol, –Davey2010Talk 01:32, 15 April 2017 (UTC) Thank you. ---Another Believer (Talk) 01:34, 15 April 2017 (UTC) @Davey2010: I definitely understand. I've been in a few situations where I was absolutely sure I was correct, but everyone disagreed with me. As you said, it's sometimes better to step back instead of doubling down. Again, thank you for handling this yourself. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 01:37, 15 April 2017 (UTC) Thanks Davey2010 for backing down. I'm sure we've all been in that situation where we are sure we're in the right but we're outnumbered (I know I have) and it's usually best to just step back from the confrontation especially when its not a big issue. AusLondonder (talk) 01:46, 15 April 2017 (UTC) Nihonjoe & AusLondonder EC - I begun to realise I perhaps was incorrect here but anyway I've done them all thanks to this beautiful tool :), Anyway no worries and I apologise for unintentionally causing disruption here, Exactly that's the other reason I reverted as I harp on to newbies about this being a collaborative project and kinda thought I was being hypocritical as I was in essence fighting against everyone if you like when this is obviously collaborative project, Anyway my apologies for the uninentiol disruption and I would like to actually thank both of you for remaining calm and for discussing it instead of running to the great swamp, Anyway thanks, –Davey2010Talk 01:56, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Template example

I created Template:Cannabis in Oregon, which could be easily modified for other U.S. states and countries. Feel free to copy and create similar templates, but please be sure there are 3+ articles to justify a navigation template. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 18:49, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

The three rule isn't hard and fast is it? Especially while an article improvement/creation drive is underway. - Bri (talk) 19:47, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

I'm not sure. Unless I'm overlooking the answer at Wikipedia:Navigation template, I think 3+ links is generally preferred, otherwise there's really not a need for a navigation template since 2 or 3 related articles can simply be linked to one another within prose. These templates are meant to connect related articles to avoid "See also" sections, etc. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 22:09, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Ideas and reminders

List of ideas / reminders. Feel free to add, edit, check off, etc.

•  Done Category:Television series about cannabis: create subcategories by country?
•  Done expand Third Eye Shoppe, then consider nominating for Good article status
•  Not done expand Weed the People, then consider nominating for Good article status
  • Anyone interested in collaborating? Additional sources appear on the article's talk page. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 18:02, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
    • Definitely maybe. I read the book. Will have a look at sources and see what can be done. - Bri (talk) 20:56, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
      • @Bri: In this case, I'm referring to the event and not the book. :p ---Another Believer _(Talk) 21:04, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
        • Whoops, I saw this and thought it was the same. - Bri (talk) 21:17, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
• if we have any industrious novice who want a simple but engaging job, we have a ton of cannabis companies and organizations where we need someone to upload logos under Fair Use. Good task to save for an enthusiastic beginner.
•  Done create subcategory Category:American documentary films about cannabis from Category:American films about cannabis and Category:Documentary films about cannabis?
•  Not done create subcategory Category:American songs about cannabis from Category:Songs about cannabis?
•  Not done sort Category:Cannabis music into subcats (easy beginner sorting job?)
• Template to invite editors to join WPCannabis? Not seeing a general invite template on our main page
• General WPC (not just Collab) barnstar?
  • If this is done, recommend creating an alternative, non-provocative version of the icon ... perhaps a rasta hat or flag (or some good ol' hemp hurds). The leaf image could be part of why there was pushback on the project invites. Another alternative is to send custom WikiLove like I did here (get the code at User:Bri/Hemp hurds WikiLove). - Bri (talk) 17:48, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
• songs about cannabis: http://www.complex.com/music/2012/04/the-50-best-weed-songs/reefer-man
• Schapelle Corby, see if this article meets GA criteria and considering nominating for Good article status? (note posted on talk page)
• Cannabis in California, file GCE request to clean it up
• are any of Chris Conrad's book notable?
•  Done List of cannabis organizations?
• Cannabis exploitation / Cannabis exploitation film / Cannabis exploitation in film?
• create List of cannabis political parties?

---Another Believer _(Talk) 22:39, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Women in Red

Just sharing the Women in Red list compiled by User:Megalibrarygirl (this link appears at the top of our redlinks page): Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Cannabis. I hope we can turn many of this red text blue in the next 2 weeks! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 01:12, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, Another Believer! Also, I hope to find more international names. If anyone has a name to add, please do! Megalibrarygirl (talk) 15:24, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Licit and Illicit Drugs

Resolved

I wonder if Draft:Licit and Illicit Drugs could be moved into the main space? Might need to make sure this book is related to cannabis enough to justify the cannabis category and tag as a WikiProject Cannabis / 420 Collaboration article. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 22:07, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Someone at WP:AFC moved it into main space. I did create this article for the 420 project because it is a book with about 60 pages of information on cannabis and related policy positions. Blue Rasberry (talk) 22:42, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Fatastic. Thanks for the heads up. I went ahead and tagged the article as part of this project. If you have any other articles in mind, please free to to create more and let us know. I'm so pleased to see articles created that be less likely to be created by volunteers, given your role. Thanks again! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 00:10, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Category:Indian works about cannabis

Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney you made Category:Indian works about cannabis. I had a question about applying the category and I thought I would ask here, since this could apply to categories for works from any culture.

Dum Maro Dum is one of the most popular Bollywood songs ever. It is from the 1970s Hare Rama Hare Krishna, in which the song is shown to refer to cannabis use. See the scene and song, in which the chorus can be translated to mean, "Take another hit, all your worries will disappear. From morning until night sing, 'Hare Krishna Hare Ram!'".

How do you imagine sorting movies which feature cannabis prominently, but are not about cannabis? I put the song in this category, but did not put in the movie in the category. What do you think? Should the movie go in? Also, the lyrics to the song are ambiguous, and taken alone without the context of the movie, the song might not about cannabis. Obviously the lyrics combined with the movie video make it about cannabis. How should this be categorized? Blue Rasberry (talk) 22:57, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

This wasn't directed to me, but I'll try to answer anyway. Questions like this always fall back to sources. Is there a source (preferably more than one) that states the song is about cannabis? If yes, go for it! If not, try harder to find one.

BTW these sources do indicate specifically that "Dum Maro Dum" is a "psychedelic" song: [3][4]. - Bri (talk) 23:07, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Global Cannabis March

Unresolved

I am surprised Global Cannabis March is a red link. Is this the same as Global Marijuana March? If so, we should redirect Global Cannabis March and add "Global Cannabis March" in bold text as an alternate name at Global Marijuana March. Seem right? ---Another Believer _(Talk) 02:29, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

As far as I know, they're the same thing. Also called Million Marijuana March. And I've seen the event publicized under several different languages. -- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 17:00, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Happy 4/20!

Happy 4/20! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:11, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Category problem

The category Cannabis in the United States by state includes things that aren't states: a territory (Guam) and the District of Columbia. But not reservations of Federally recognized Indian tribes. So... it's just bugging me. - Bri (talk) 18:24, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

I just think of it as "state" in the broader sense of "government entity" and I feel fine. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 18:25, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Oh, I see, you're going the other direction and saying optimally each tribe/nation should have its own page? We do have the catch-all Category:Cannabis on American Indian reservations (filed in the same cat as the 50 states and the territories) but I have no objection to having standalone articles for individual tribal nations where there are sufficient sources. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 18:27, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

That might be true but it wasn't actually what I was thinking. Let's just ask what category the existing reservations article should go into. Surely not "by state"? A parallel problem may exist with the courts e.g. Tribal court and Superior Court of the District of Columbia are outside the state courts hierarchy. But at least there, DC and tribes are consistently excluded. - Bri (talk) 18:39, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Meh, for me I'm inclined to leave it be. I don't want to under-rate the sovereignty of territories or tribes. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 18:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Tribes are debateable but U.S. territories are not sovereign in any way. - Bri (talk) 18:44, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

I moved some of the articles/categories out of the "by state" category and into the parent Category:Cannabis in the United States. The "by state" category should be reserved for U.S. states. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 18:46, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

@Bri: Is the category looking better to you now? ---Another Believer _(Talk) 18:51, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Sure, I don't want to belabor it. We could create another level later if necessary. - Bri (talk) 18:56, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Not belaboring. I'm a bit obsessed with categorization. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 21:50, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

420 news

• USA Today above the fold front page story "4/20 is pot's Black Friday"
• Denver Post front page story "Denver 4/20 in the Trump era: celebration or political rally?" (online) (below huge headline titled "Marijuana: opinions and politics")
• Spokesan-Review (Spokane, Wash.) 2 of 3 front page columns; "420 Day" in two inch high font (online)

Confirm via Newseum - Bri (talk) 19:49, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

I posted a few sources at Talk:420_(cannabis_culture)#2017_sources in case folks want newer sources for improving the article. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 20:43, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Super. By the way 420 (cannabis culture) is linked from Wikipedia's Main Page, which at 20 million views per day is greater readership than the circulation of any U.S. national newspaper. - Bri (talk) 21:59, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, I like how the top of the talk page shows each Main Page appearance by year. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 22:19, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Speaking of which, it got almost 370,000 pageviews yesterday. Considerably more than the article for any world leader I can find right off the bat. Not bad. - Bri (talk) 16:59, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Possibly created/improved content at other Wikipedias

• https://es.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tintura_de_cannabis&action=history
• https://es.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Blunt_(cigarrillo_de_cannabis)&action=history
• https://da.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hamp_(art)&action=history
• https://es.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Variedades_e_h%C3%ADbridos_de_Cannabis_sativa&action=history

---Another Believer _(Talk) 20:43, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Good eye! I'll go through them later and file them appropriately. Did you find those manually, or do you have some fancy alert set up? Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 21:04, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

@Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney: I searched "cannabis"+"Wikipedia" at Google, and reduced search returns to the last 24 hours (week or so is probably a better search). Mostly I was seeing if the 420 collaboration was picked up by any other outlets, but these came up as search returns. I'm not sure how much we want to credit this campaign for content at other Wikipedias (you may have a better sense, since you distributed invites) but sure is cool to see and track. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 21:30, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Feel free to post any others you run across, and I'll look into them. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 22:47, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Will do! Thanks for helping to invite others, track new and improved content, and curate lists of results of this campaign. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 22:48, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Added them, will visually check some other languages for new appearances, and/or try doing the same search you did but for the term for "cannabis" in languages which use a different term. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 18:07, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

A non-comprehensive look at German Wikipedia showed these edits during our collaboration. It's not clear that any of these were because of the invite there. de:Hanf on 12 April, de:Hanf als Rauschmittel on 12–13 April, de:Marihuana and de:420 (Cannabis-Kultur) on 20 April. Bri (talk) 16:21, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

• https://it.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=420_(cannabis)&action=history ---Another Believer _(Talk) 04:08, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
• https://es.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kifi&action=history ---Another Believer _(Talk) 04:10, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

@Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney: Just making sure you saw these links as well. I'll be sure to post others in this section if I come across any. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 20:47, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

• https://it.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Marijuana&action=history ??? ---Another Believer _(Talk) 01:32, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Not to over-buzz about the bee in mine own bonnet, but when we publish the results of the Collab, can we be sure to include our allies' additions to other-language Wikipedias as well? I'll also check out the 420 (cannabis culture) equivalents at each language that was invited to the Collab to see if said article was improved during the window. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 22:51, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Re: Cannabis policy of the Donald Trump administration

Folks may be interested in contributing to Talk:Cannabis policy of the Donald Trump administration re: merge. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 21:34, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

420 collab timeline

Started a timeline of this project here: WT:WikiProject Cannabis/420 Collaboration 2017 timeline, thought it might help with retrospective analysis and communicating what we have done. - Bri (talk) 05:23, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for sharing. Interesting to see which entires you decided to add. If others have additions or changes in mind, would you prefer we edit directly, or comment here or on the talk page? ---Another Believer _(Talk) 05:28, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

Please edit the list directly. - Bri (talk) 05:57, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

@Another Believer: It looks like you proposed an event in 2015 [5], but it didn't take off. What worked better when you proposed it in 2016? - Bri (talk) 16:11, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

I wish I had a better answer, but all I can say is right timing and right people involved. Also, I've been wanting to do a 420 collaboration for a while, but the Wikimedia Conference (which I attended in 2015 and 2016) was generally around the same time, so I was more focused on the conference. Since I did not attend this year, I was able to devote more time to this campaign. I'm just so glad a handful of dedicated editors were willing to get together and work on articles about an often stigmatized topic. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:34, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

Adding an Event Article - Manchester 420 Gathering

Help Needed Please! I went to the Manchester 420 Gathering yesterday, and wanted to create an event page seeing as the festical is now in it's seventh year running, and easily over a thousand turned up yesterday, it has turned into quite a big event. The only problem is I have never created a Wiki article before, and have been struggling. I first tried to create a stub under Cannabis 420 culture, but I didn't know what I was doing and ended up editing a ton of stuff I didn't mean to. I have created the article here: Draft:Manchester_420_Gathering If anyone can help with it I would be very appreciative! Thanks, Lauren — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bothknees (talk • contribs) 15:58, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

@Bothknees: It looks like your new Draft:Manchester 420 Gathering got some feedback from one of our own project members. Maybe you missed it? It's at the top of the page. Feel free to reply here again if you're still having trouble. Also, we really could use some images, so as soon as it's convenient could you try to upload at Wikimedia Commons? - Bri (talk) 17:10, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

This would actually be pretty easy to make main space appropriate. Just needs some inline citations and formatting. I'll see if I can get to this later. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 15:23, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Cannabis articles spiked last October on ja.wikipedia

Japan is, as always, different from many Western countries. Something appears to have happened to spike readership on a number of cannabis related articles on Japanese Wikipedia last year, around October 24. There's no correlation to readership on en.wiki. Any guesses what happened? Maybe it's something we can include in this article improvement drive. It might have been Saya Takagi's arrest [6]. - Bri (talk) 23:54, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Goals: 100 new articles, 75 new categories, and 25 new templates

I've moved and expanded this "Goals" section to include 100 new articles, 75 new categories, and 25 new templates. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 20:19, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

100 new articles

100% complete

Thank you to the editors who participated in this campaign to improve Wikipedia!

Possibly a stretch goal here, but worth a shot! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 16:54, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

I should note, there are several drafts that could be moved into the main space. There are also a few drafts that have already been tagged as 420 collaborations and appear on the project list. Either way, if you have drafts that can be moved within the next few days, that would be great and get us closer to the 100 article goal. Thanks! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:48, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

I scanned the remaining drafts and think the quality is closest to publish-able on the following:

• Draft:Bernard Rappaz  Done ---Another Believer _(Talk) 20:13, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
• Draft:Rudy Reyes (activist)  Done -- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 04:05, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
• Draft:TROG

Other project members are encouraged to try to tackle these; all three would get us to 99 articles! I need to take a little break. - Bri (talk) 19:38, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

 Done Wow, congrats and well done, folks! I hope you're as proud of this work (100 new articles in 2 weeks!) as I am. Thanks. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 01:05, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

75 new categories

100% complete

Can we create 7 new (and helpful) categories in the next few days? ---Another Believer _(Talk) 20:19, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Well done! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 01:22, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

25 new templates

100% complete

Can we create 7 new (and helpful) templates in the next few days? ---Another Believer _(Talk) 20:19, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Needed:

• Template:Cannabis and religion  Done
• Template:Cannabis in Australia  Done
• Template:Cannabis in Canada
• Template:Cannabis in China  Done
• Template:Cannabis in France  Done
• Template:Cannabis in Hawaii  Done
• Template:Cannabis in Indonesia  Done
• Template:Cannabis in Mexico  Done
• Template:Cannabis in Michigan  Done
• Template:Cannabis in New York  Done
• Template:Cannabis in New Zealand  Done
• Template:Cannabis in Norway  Done
• Template:Cannabis in Spain  Done
• Template:Cannabis in the United Kingdom  Done
• Template:Cannabis in Wisconsin  Done

---Another Believer _(Talk) 01:15, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

 Done Great work! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:58, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Slang

There are 8 or so slang red links at Wikipedia:WikiProject Cannabis/Redlinks. I'm wondering if these should all be redirected to List of names for cannabis for now, unless someone know there is enough coverage/history about a particular word to justify a standalone Wikipedia article? ---Another Believer _(Talk) 21:05, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Words that I think deserve their own pages, like groovy, include: Chronic, Ganja, Grass, Reefer, Sinsemilla, Trees. -- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 01:56, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

• Grass - During the 1968 presidential election, supporters of Eugene McCarthy campaigned with the slogan, "Kennedy has the grass, McCarthy has the roots." -- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 17:31, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

• Ganja - This word predates the word marijuana, and possibly predates the word hemp, and might even predate the word cannabis. -- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 17:39, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

• Chronic and Dank - These words have moved beyond the cannabis culture and are now more than simply terms for "high quality herb." The words also mean good and cool. And magazines, bands, record albums, television shows have taken their names. -- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 17:50, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

• Sinsemilla - Before chronic and dank it was sinsemilla, used for magazines, bands, comic books. Heck, Ben Masel's daughter is named Semilla (that would mean "seed" v. sin-semilla "without seed"). And the word itself has a bit of Spanish culture history too. -- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 18:06, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

• Reefer - One of the oldies, there are probably other hipster-era terms also deserving articles. Reefer was used in the title of the infamous film Reefer Madness, and it is the root of newer words like reeferphobia. -- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 18:45, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

• Trees - Citations for this new term, as would be expected, are all very recent. Nevertheless there's enough for a long, interesting article about the history, which goes back much further than "marijuana enthusiasts" on Reddit, including the pineapple logo, which is rooted in older elements of cannabis culture (think Pineapple Express). I believe a connection will be found to the Tree of Life pagan spiritual movement. -- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 19:00, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

I created redirect pages for List of names for hemp and List of names for marijuana. -- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 00:37, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

GrassRoots: The Cannabis Revolution (documentary)

Thought I'd mention this documentary here and see if anyone wants to create a Wikipedia page for it. I have no experience of creating Wikipedia pages, so I thought someone could create it a lot faster and more easily than me. I shall also post some links for more info on the film to make is easier for whomever is creating the page. Finding information about it is quite easy via Google.

Official website: http://www.grassrootsdocu.com/
IMDb page: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt5650964/
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/grassrootsdocu
Twitter: https://twitter.com/GrassRootsDocu
YouTube trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-FGuuD4nlY0

Thank you in advance to anyone that decides to create this. Helper201 (talk) 07:39, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

@Helper201: It would be super helpful if you could add any links to critical commentary, positive or negative, about the work. I'm afraid we can't start an article with the social media links you gave above. - Bri (talk) 22:52, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

I'm afraid this is all I could find - http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/jason-reed/grassroots-the-cannabis-r_b_7227194.html

If I find anything else in the future I'll add it here. Helper201 (talk) 13:29, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

COI at List of British politicians who have acknowledged cannabis use

Is this diff ok given the conflict of interest? I am still going to add the 420 collaboration tag to the article's talk page, given other edits during our timeframe. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 13:55, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

You are correct, best practice is for academics not to add their own research to articles. However, this is a peccadillo: sometimes we see it happen across dozens of articles and that's when it is a problem that needs to be addressed. - Bri (talk) 14:10, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

No worries, just didn't know if the article or talk page needed any changes based on these edits. Thanks! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 14:17, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Alexis Bortell

BTW, another potential COI issue re: Draft:Alexis Bortell. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 20:08, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Oy, that is awful. Probably should be raised at COIN after this is all done. - Bri (talk) 01:20, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Aside from the username of the originator, it's not as bad as it looks. She has a decent body of media coverage, and a quick sweep cleaned up most of the Tone issues. Mainly we just need someone to cite facts to sources (not me, activist articles aren't my focus). Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 18:39, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Can someone request pics of Shona Banda on Facebook?

I don't publicly do cannabis stuff with my FB account (sorry but I just deal with a wide variety of people in my life/work), but if there's anyone here who openly supports cannabis on Facebook, could you ping the appropriate FB pages (maybe "Shona Banda Live Free or Die" or just Shona Banda to ask if anyone has a photo(s) that they themselves own the rights to which they can upload to Wikimedia Commons for use in the article? Caveat that we're not taking sides, just asking on pages where there are likely to be interested parties with photos. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 19:52, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

And also to confirm her birth-year. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 19:53, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

I wish there was a way I could help. Shona Banda is a great article! I got a picture of a minor-party political candidate via facebook by "friend-ing" the candidate and then messaging him directly to ask who took his picture. And then I "friend-ed" the photographer (someone on the candidate's "friend list") and messaged her directly and got the permission. That might be the only way to use social media, by directly contacting the individual posting a picture you see there. Good luck! -- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 19:11, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Finish-line focus: knock out all Drafts and Templates?

Just a suggestion: should our goal for the last days/hours be to polish off all viable Drafts (and remove any non-viables from our own list and just let AFC deal with them?) and complete the redlinked Templates, so all we have left is Redlinks and Expansion and then we can repurpose this list for our regular post-Collab work? Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 16:09, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Sounds good. I just linked from the redlist to the entire draft category. Everything was in there. - Bri (talk) 23:06, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

I've finished almost all the redlink Templates, but would welcome help on the last couple. Of the Drafts, I suggest the following would be the most straightforward to knock out in the remaining hours:

• Draft talk:Alexis Bortell
• Draft talk:Bombay Hemp Company
• Draft talk:Cannabis refugees
• Draft talk:Manchester 420 Gathering
• Draft talk:National Marijuana Initiative
• Draft talk:Promena Movement

Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 14:15, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

8 hours to go, and I'm gone to a meeting for the rest of the day. Best wishes, everyone! I think this has been a great project, both productive and rewarding. -- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 16:09, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

I have family in town, so I wasn't able to do much during the campaign's final days, but I want to thank everyone who helped and think this project was a great success. I'll be distributing some barnstars in the near future, then archiving this page appropriately. I'll also put together a report and solicit feedback to gauge interest in repeating this campaign next year and getting feedback for what we might do differently, etc. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 15:54, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

I have feedback as well, should we collect our diverse comments somewhere and then merge them into a final report? Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 16:02, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Yes. See below section. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 16:11, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Feedback

I'll be compiled a brief report about this campaign, but beforehand, I'd love to get some feedback about this campaign, specifically:

• Are you interested in participating in a similar campaign in 2018?
• What should we do differently if we repeat this campaign?

All comments, suggestions, and feedback are welcome. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 16:11, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Lots of things went well, especially AB's preparation of the project infrastructure, redlinks/to-do list, etc. Hoping I don't touch a nerve here but I will be direct about the could-be-better side. If you look at outcomes you will notice that the list is dominated by 4 people (you know who you are :) ). A project like this will be more effective in future if we can mobilize a broader pool of interested contributors. This year we know there were ... 'impediments' to the outreach efforts to other projects. Also I'd say although there were messages asking people to contribute from all corners of the political/philosophical space regarding attitudes towards the plant, contributors weren't a well-mixed representation of different POVs or diverse in other ways (e.g. all of us are male and in the U.S. I think). How can this be remedied and a message of inclusion and welcoming be conveyed?

Next time around I'd like to see a lot more participation on:

• Agricultural products and methods
• Fabric and fiber use
• Laws in countries other than the United States
• Plant biology and conservation (e.g. Small 2016, chapters 3-6 and 17)
• Religious aspects listed in redlist (Islam, Judaism, LDS)
• Ritual use in Africa, Asia (esp Japan), indigenous cultures worldwide

I think any or all of these would help round out the project and perhaps lend some legitimacy. Thanks for reading - Bri (talk) 16:43, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Totally concur for big ups to AB for spearheading this collab (and being the single largest contributor to it). And I agree that overall this was quite a success, especially for a first-run. Concur with Bri that for 2018 (and I definitely think we should do this again!) we should make inclusion a *large* aspect of the drive, since this drive really fleshed out the cat/template tree and added a lot of new articles. Frankly, given the choice for 2018 I'd rather have fewer new articles/cats/templates, but more improved articles, more photos/videos, more foreign-language expansion/translation, and especially more novice editors who might be cannabist enthusiasts but not already Wikipedia editors.

What went well: tons of new articles, great improvements in templates, really strengthened the cat-tree, added/organized a number of "Women in Cannabis" (some of that slightly predated the collab).

What went okay:

• Foreign language participation wasn't as robust as I hoped, but still got several good new pieces (and a great Czech translation of Cannabis in Japan that slightly pre-dated the drive).
• Some photos added, but in my ideal world some helpful newbie would've dropped in and done the grunt-work of adding dozens of Fair Use logos to companies/parties.

What didn't go as well as hoped

• Too many of the same regular contributors. Y'all are lovely people, but we already hang around this project, so more fresh blood would be great. To my knowledge, we may have had a couple helpful drive-through IPs, and had a few non-regulars that did some nice work, but it wasn't huge.
• Despite my hopes, almost nobody uploaded new personal cannabis imagery/video. I'd hoped someone new would drop in and post pics from their vacation to Guyana, or video of how dabbing works, but not this go-round.
• I'll take the hit for the lack of serious media coverage; I thought I could just dash out a Press Release and send it from a fresh Yahoo account to a bunch of big-timers, but got basically no nibbles from 26 outlets. Instead, I think a decent PR campaign in 2018 should involve actual networking and planning to get the attention of the major cannabis media. Also, since we did get good attention from minor cannabis media, in 2018 we should make a point of including even the small-fry in our campaign. Even if some small-time blog posts us, that could still bring in interest.

Big ideas for 2018

• My overall biggest goal for 2018 420 Collab is to really plan and work the social media angle. We should have a specific hash-tag popularizing the drive, we should shoot it out to all kinds of big-time tweeters who cover cannabis topics (including anti folks), really get the word out. And maybe the Twitter campaign could both be "how to contribute" but also just a "hey, look around Wikipedia cannabis articles and share with your friends what cool stuff you learned on 420!" Just drawing attention to our coverage could bring in more long-term interest in the Project. If none of us are Twitter-fiends, we should a few months in advance find people who are, maybe there are Wikipedians who specialize in media engagement as a hobby, and despite being impartial to cannabis might enjoy helping publicize a collab to work their skills?

That's what I got for now, but I do concur for having a strong After Action Report on how this went, and after that maybe a smaller insiders-workgroup just to clean up and standardize the new content to catch mistakes, unify formats of templates, etc. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 00:01, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

• Just pointing out, I'm not a regular WP:C contributor - Bri (talk) 00:16, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Well, you certainly pull your weight here! Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 02:02, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for your feedback thus far. I'll respond to this, and draft a campaign report in the near future. There are still a few pages being debated, so I'd like to see what sticks before calculating total outcomes and sharing my overall thoughts. Looking forward to a continued discussion, and glad to see some interest in repeating this effort again. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 00:04, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

Edits of concern

I created Ricardo Baca bio for the WP:420 collab. Because I am the creator I'm not going to join in any direct editing at this time due to strong desire not to WP:OWN this. However there's a lot of conflict-y editing at the article lately that introduced questionable content that may have crossed the line to WP:PROMO. More eyes-on are welcome. ☆ Bri (talk) 22:58, 6 October 2017 (UTC)