Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Psychoactive and Recreational Drugs/Archive 3
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Wikipedia:WikiProject Psychoactive and Recreational Drugs. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
Possible related portal
I am considering creating a portal to cover psychedelic drugs and entheogens. I think this is a good grouping for a portal, and i dont think that deleriants and dissociatives need to be included. If i do this, i plan to both create the template and fill it up quickly to a good standard, as i have worked on adding content to a large number of defunct or moribund portals. I think the best name would be Portal:Entheogens and psychedelic drugs, as it references the exact names of the 2 main articles (unfortunately those articles arent the best we have). other possibilities would be Portal:Entheogens and psychedelics (which flows better) or Portal:Psychedelic and entheogenic drugs (not mixing up an adjective like psychedelic with a noun like entheogen). it probably doesnt matter much. if others want to join in, fine but ill be able to get this up and running fairly easily. I will have the FA, GA and B/top/high class articles, broken into articles and biographies, and will try to get at least 50 images to rotate through. I will eventually add DYK's in groups, but will use the Wikipedia:Wikiproject Psychedelics, Dissociatives and Deliriants/Recognized content to check for articles that i may have missed.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 06:16, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
- I don't understand why you would want to fracture the project like this. Why not just focus your efforts on your preferred articles in this wikiproject? We'd love to have someone with your motivation on board. Testem (talk) 09:59, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
- If people want any portal connected to this project to exactly mirror it, then thats what i will create. however, my interest is in creating a portal, as i feel that readers could benefit from a single spot to help them navigate this particular fragmented subject, and i dont feel motivated yet to work on articles. if people are opposed to a portal, then i will drop it, of course. i dont want to fracture the project, i just thought that a slightly more narrowly focused portal could fly. also, while i know the pharmacology and effects are interrelated, my interest is only in the mind manifesting and divinity manifesting properties of drugs, so i really dont care much about the dissociatives and deliriants (which are relatively new concepts, as is "entheogen", though it refers to an ancient tradition, while most of the delirients and dissociatives are more recent creations). regardless of my editing preferences, i will go along with consensus, and if there is no consensus, i wont do anything. I will of course consider editing articles, and thanks for the invite to do so. (note my username and Argyreia nervosa).Mercurywoodrose (talk) 14:51, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
- If you have no interest in editing then I would strongly discourage creating another wikiproject. You would need to lead by example. I feel most readers do not make use of portals and this would not be productive for them either. Finally, remember that brugmansia has been a component of ayahuasca for many years. Testem (talk) 09:46, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
- I didnt propose a new wikiproject. i am proposing a portal to accompany this project. So far thats 2 editors that dont want me contributing in the manner i prefer, creating portal associated with a project, a standard practice at hundreds of wikiprojects. My creating a portal wont interfere with anyone elses editing. I didnt say i wont contribute to articles. this will likely inspire me. but having editors that seem hostile to my intent, and cannot seem to appreciate my intent or my reasons, and dont seem to notice that i would now like to operate from consensus, is REALLY turning me off to this. I dont constantly remember the composition of ayahuasca, but i like to think that while working on my requested portal, i would have naturally discovered that a component of an entheogenic compound is (im guessing, from your comment), some form of delieriant or dissociative. in which case, i would have said "oh, then the boundary IS pretty fluid, they were right to include those chemicals in this project", and even if i hadnt already agreed to include all those chemicals (which i have done now), would then have definitely include them. I honestly didnt know that any of those 2 classes of chemicals overlapped with entheo/psyched, so thats my error. I hope that example of ignorance doesnt disqualify me from working on the topic. I can guess that the decisions to have this project include certain chemicals on the edge of the range of effects covered, involved some debate. Im not a complete expert, so i would start with including ALL the articles in this project in the portal, per my statement above, and add "selected articles", biographies, etc. which seem both central to the topic and of high quality, and not downplay some chemicals due to a personal lack of interest in the article. I dont have an answer as to whether portals are used effectively enough to be worth their creation or maintenance. I do know that some portals get dozens, and even hundreds, of hits per day, so someone is looking at them. I also know that many portals are very poorly maintained, so i would be absolutely sure that a portal here was fully functional from day 1. i have tried to revive about a half dozen portals, such as Portal:San Francisco Bay Area (at least 90% my content and structure now). ive also proposed deleting some really bad ones (Portal:Mexico City), with some editors arguing that a bare bones stub is fine, even if it doesnt help the reader at all, as "it may someday be improved" (i have a big problem with that, wont get into it here). so Im getting mixed reactions all around. I hate having portals where the contents of the article intros (usually just the lede from the article) are up to 8 years out of date, and intend with any portal i work on to check on them periodically and update the article intros to match the current article. ok, im going on too long. I am still welcome to feedback, and hope that someone can say whether they are opposed to a portal or supportive. I promise to not create a portal if there are enough people opposed to it, for any reason, and not just wary of it or my motives.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 16:11, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
- I was watching this discussion and, initially, I wasn't sure what to say. As far as I can determine, creation of a portal would be an entirely good thing, and I would welcome you doing so. But I think that the issue arises from giving the portal a different name than the WikiProject. Therefore, please let me suggest that you create Portal:Psychedelics, Dissociatives and Deliriants. There is no reason why such a portal could not have a section featuring ethneogens. I suspect that doing it in that manner would remove the concerns amongst other editors about working at cross purposes with the WikiProject, and I believe that it would be a win-win. --Tryptofish (talk) 20:28, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
- I didnt propose a new wikiproject. i am proposing a portal to accompany this project. So far thats 2 editors that dont want me contributing in the manner i prefer, creating portal associated with a project, a standard practice at hundreds of wikiprojects. My creating a portal wont interfere with anyone elses editing. I didnt say i wont contribute to articles. this will likely inspire me. but having editors that seem hostile to my intent, and cannot seem to appreciate my intent or my reasons, and dont seem to notice that i would now like to operate from consensus, is REALLY turning me off to this. I dont constantly remember the composition of ayahuasca, but i like to think that while working on my requested portal, i would have naturally discovered that a component of an entheogenic compound is (im guessing, from your comment), some form of delieriant or dissociative. in which case, i would have said "oh, then the boundary IS pretty fluid, they were right to include those chemicals in this project", and even if i hadnt already agreed to include all those chemicals (which i have done now), would then have definitely include them. I honestly didnt know that any of those 2 classes of chemicals overlapped with entheo/psyched, so thats my error. I hope that example of ignorance doesnt disqualify me from working on the topic. I can guess that the decisions to have this project include certain chemicals on the edge of the range of effects covered, involved some debate. Im not a complete expert, so i would start with including ALL the articles in this project in the portal, per my statement above, and add "selected articles", biographies, etc. which seem both central to the topic and of high quality, and not downplay some chemicals due to a personal lack of interest in the article. I dont have an answer as to whether portals are used effectively enough to be worth their creation or maintenance. I do know that some portals get dozens, and even hundreds, of hits per day, so someone is looking at them. I also know that many portals are very poorly maintained, so i would be absolutely sure that a portal here was fully functional from day 1. i have tried to revive about a half dozen portals, such as Portal:San Francisco Bay Area (at least 90% my content and structure now). ive also proposed deleting some really bad ones (Portal:Mexico City), with some editors arguing that a bare bones stub is fine, even if it doesnt help the reader at all, as "it may someday be improved" (i have a big problem with that, wont get into it here). so Im getting mixed reactions all around. I hate having portals where the contents of the article intros (usually just the lede from the article) are up to 8 years out of date, and intend with any portal i work on to check on them periodically and update the article intros to match the current article. ok, im going on too long. I am still welcome to feedback, and hope that someone can say whether they are opposed to a portal or supportive. I promise to not create a portal if there are enough people opposed to it, for any reason, and not just wary of it or my motives.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 16:11, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
- If you have no interest in editing then I would strongly discourage creating another wikiproject. You would need to lead by example. I feel most readers do not make use of portals and this would not be productive for them either. Finally, remember that brugmansia has been a component of ayahuasca for many years. Testem (talk) 09:46, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
- If people want any portal connected to this project to exactly mirror it, then thats what i will create. however, my interest is in creating a portal, as i feel that readers could benefit from a single spot to help them navigate this particular fragmented subject, and i dont feel motivated yet to work on articles. if people are opposed to a portal, then i will drop it, of course. i dont want to fracture the project, i just thought that a slightly more narrowly focused portal could fly. also, while i know the pharmacology and effects are interrelated, my interest is only in the mind manifesting and divinity manifesting properties of drugs, so i really dont care much about the dissociatives and deliriants (which are relatively new concepts, as is "entheogen", though it refers to an ancient tradition, while most of the delirients and dissociatives are more recent creations). regardless of my editing preferences, i will go along with consensus, and if there is no consensus, i wont do anything. I will of course consider editing articles, and thanks for the invite to do so. (note my username and Argyreia nervosa).Mercurywoodrose (talk) 14:51, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
WikiProject X is live!
Hello everyone!
You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!
Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.
Harej (talk) 16:56, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
Huh?
I was curious about the inclusion of this project on the Talk page of the article on Garth Hudson. Why is it there when there is no mention of drug usage in the article itself? At the very least there is only a tenuous connection in my mind. Thoughts?THX1136 (talk) 15:08, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
- I don't see a connection so I removed it from the talk page. Sizeofint (talk) 15:27, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
Broaden scope and rename project
This WikiProject seems to be inactive. I think part of the reason is that it is too specific. Why not broaden the scope and rename the project to something like "Recreational and entheogenic drugs"? Sizeofint (talk) 20:10, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
- I think that's a good idea, and I would support that change. It might also be a good idea to put notices pointing to this discussion at WT:WikiProject Pharmacology, and perhaps at WT:WikiProject Medicine. --Tryptofish (talk) 21:23, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
- perhaps a refined name that will catch the readers attention--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 22:07, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
- Sure 'entheogenic' catched me, but that wouldn't help much.
Why tryWhy not try: "Recreational and spiritual drugs" (did I?). -DePiep (talk) 22:56, 7 July 2015 (UTC)- I find "entheogenic" kind of un-catchy, too. Maybe "Recreational and shamanic drugs"? (I think drugs can be used spiritually, but they can't really be spiritual.) --Tryptofish (talk) 23:11, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
- I was only joking. A punishment for having to look up that word. -DePiep (talk) 23:17, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
- Yes, I realized that! :) --Tryptofish (talk) 23:57, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
- Judging from the entheogen article, entheogenic is a catch-all descriptor for drugs used in religious, spiritual, or shamanic settings. IMO this makes it the correct word to use. As noted, it does have the disadvantage of being somewhat obscure. Sizeofint (talk) 06:31, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
- Indeed, it's a subjective call. My opinion is that it's so obscure that it will counteract the very reason for considering the name change: people seeing it will feel like it's something very technical and outside of their editing interests, and it will be an obstacle to attracting more active editing. But it does have the advantage of precision. I recognize also that religious and spiritual are not exactly the same thing as shamanic, but on the other hand, I think that those are distinctions that we need not make in the project name. I've tried to think of other alternatives, and the best I could come up with is ethnopharmacology, which does not work, because it encompasses pharmacologies of all sorts, outside of the mind. Another possibility might be "WikiProject Recreational drugs", and just leave it at that, explaining the spiritual aspects in the text but not in the name. Doing that raises the issue of whether it is demeaning to those cultures for whom the religious uses are a serious enterprise, not recreational. I could live with that, but I can also see how there can be valid objections. --Tryptofish (talk) 23:57, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
- What about "Recreational and religious drugs"? It has a nice alliteration and I expect people will have a better handle on the meaning of "religious" than "shamanic". Those people who are spiritual but not religious will likely take issue but I think it can easily be inferred that the project covers spiritual uses as well. Sizeofint (talk) 00:34, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
- Good, I think that's the best suggestion so far! I could happily support that, although I guess a case could be made for something like "religiously-used" or "religion-based" instead of "religious". --Tryptofish (talk) 18:14, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
- As an uninvolved third party, I think adding religion to the name will do more harm than good. Some will not come to this project because it contains the word religion. Others will specifically come to this project just because it has the word religion. Having religion in the title may also completely change the direction of this project, and I can foresee potential POV pushing in both directions. I think the scope of entheogenic (and religiously-used) drugs is completely appropriate, but I'd keep the project name simple. "Recreational drugs" should be sufficient. --Scott Alter (talk) 19:17, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
- That hadn't occurred to me, but I think you are right. --Tryptofish (talk) 20:42, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
- What about "Recreational and religious drugs"? It has a nice alliteration and I expect people will have a better handle on the meaning of "religious" than "shamanic". Those people who are spiritual but not religious will likely take issue but I think it can easily be inferred that the project covers spiritual uses as well. Sizeofint (talk) 00:34, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
- Indeed, it's a subjective call. My opinion is that it's so obscure that it will counteract the very reason for considering the name change: people seeing it will feel like it's something very technical and outside of their editing interests, and it will be an obstacle to attracting more active editing. But it does have the advantage of precision. I recognize also that religious and spiritual are not exactly the same thing as shamanic, but on the other hand, I think that those are distinctions that we need not make in the project name. I've tried to think of other alternatives, and the best I could come up with is ethnopharmacology, which does not work, because it encompasses pharmacologies of all sorts, outside of the mind. Another possibility might be "WikiProject Recreational drugs", and just leave it at that, explaining the spiritual aspects in the text but not in the name. Doing that raises the issue of whether it is demeaning to those cultures for whom the religious uses are a serious enterprise, not recreational. I could live with that, but I can also see how there can be valid objections. --Tryptofish (talk) 23:57, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
- I was only joking. A punishment for having to look up that word. -DePiep (talk) 23:17, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
- I find "entheogenic" kind of un-catchy, too. Maybe "Recreational and shamanic drugs"? (I think drugs can be used spiritually, but they can't really be spiritual.) --Tryptofish (talk) 23:11, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
- Sure 'entheogenic' catched me, but that wouldn't help much.
- perhaps a refined name that will catch the readers attention--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 22:07, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
I think that is a good point and I am not opposed to going that route. What about "Recreational drugs and entheogens"? The weight is on the Recreational drugs portion so I think people will have get a good sense of the purpose of the project at a glance. Entheogen is easier to lookup than entheogenic for those curious. Sizeofint (talk) 22:37, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
- I'm still kind of stuck on the over-technicality of that term. It occurs to me that we could go in a different direction instead, by focusing on what the drugs do more than on their religious/spiritual aspects. And for the reasons that Scott Alter pointed out, it would really be best for the Project not to advertise the POV-laden religious aspects anyway. Perhaps: "Recreational and psychoactive drugs" or "Recreational and psychotropic drugs"? Those are also technical terms, but they are more widely familiar and their meaning is intuitively obvious. Our page on psychoactive drugs is pretty much what this Project is about, and psychotropic drugs redirects to it. --Tryptofish (talk) 23:08, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
- Are there recreational drugs that aren't psychoactive? If not we could just call it "Psychoactive drugs". Going this route makes it more of a task force within WikiProject Pharmacology - not necessarily a bad thing but something worth thinking about. Sizeofint (talk) 00:43, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
- I think the answer to that question is no, because to be recreational, a drug has to be experienced as pleasurable, and to be pleasurable, it has to be psychoactive. So all recreational drugs (or pretty much all, for all practical purposes) are psychoactive, but not all psychoactive drugs are recreational. (Naloxone would be a good example of a drug that is definitely psychoactive, but would not be useful recreationally, and indeed is used to suppress recreational drug use. And pretty much all of the medicines used for psychiatric disorders are psychoactive, but have either limited or no use for recreation.) I'd be fine with switching the order, to "Psychoactive and recreational drugs", as that puts the more general class first, but I'd be reluctant to prune it all the way to just "Psychoactive drugs", because that would actually expand the topic area to include all the medical drugs. I also continue to be OK with just "Recreational drugs". --Tryptofish (talk) 20:00, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
- I like "Psychoactive and recreational drugs". If we have consensus going with this I suppose the next steps are to move the page and change the project banner template. Sizeofint (talk) 22:50, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
- That sounds good to me. Let's give it a few days in case any other editors disagree, and if not, then we should go ahead as you described. Thanks for raising the issue in the first place. --Tryptofish (talk) 23:39, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
- Not a bad name change, it was needed.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 15:06, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks! Now all we just need some contributors :) Sizeofint (talk) 19:37, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
- They're too stoned to write.
--Tryptofish (talk) 23:03, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
- They're too stoned to write.
- Thanks! Now all we just need some contributors :) Sizeofint (talk) 19:37, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
- Not a bad name change, it was needed.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 15:06, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
- That sounds good to me. Let's give it a few days in case any other editors disagree, and if not, then we should go ahead as you described. Thanks for raising the issue in the first place. --Tryptofish (talk) 23:39, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
- I like "Psychoactive and recreational drugs". If we have consensus going with this I suppose the next steps are to move the page and change the project banner template. Sizeofint (talk) 22:50, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
- I think the answer to that question is no, because to be recreational, a drug has to be experienced as pleasurable, and to be pleasurable, it has to be psychoactive. So all recreational drugs (or pretty much all, for all practical purposes) are psychoactive, but not all psychoactive drugs are recreational. (Naloxone would be a good example of a drug that is definitely psychoactive, but would not be useful recreationally, and indeed is used to suppress recreational drug use. And pretty much all of the medicines used for psychiatric disorders are psychoactive, but have either limited or no use for recreation.) I'd be fine with switching the order, to "Psychoactive and recreational drugs", as that puts the more general class first, but I'd be reluctant to prune it all the way to just "Psychoactive drugs", because that would actually expand the topic area to include all the medical drugs. I also continue to be OK with just "Recreational drugs". --Tryptofish (talk) 20:00, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
- Are there recreational drugs that aren't psychoactive? If not we could just call it "Psychoactive drugs". Going this route makes it more of a task force within WikiProject Pharmacology - not necessarily a bad thing but something worth thinking about. Sizeofint (talk) 00:43, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
I am willing to contribute. Tell me how can I help. Please message me. User:zahid2cyborg —Preceding undated comment added 09:04, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
- Posted on talk page. Sizeofint (talk) 17:33, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
Importance rating now implemented
Please add importance ratings on the talk page as you come across unrated articles. Thanks! Sizeofint (talk) 18:45, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
- Also added a Redirect option for class type. You can now use this instead of NA or other classes on redirects. Sizeofint (talk) 09:05, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
Fixed quality/importance table
Check out the new quality/importance table on the main page. On a related note, does anyone know how to get the WikiWork factors section to show? Sizeofint (talk) 17:46, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
Combine this project with WP:WikiProject Drug Policy
I have made at post about this at WT:WikiProject Drug Policy. Please make any comments there. Sizeofint (talk) 17:49, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
Popular articles
WikiProject Medicine has a good tool for determining popular medical articles. Since a lot of the articles in this project are also medicine articles it is useful for this project too. Check out User:West.andrew.g/Popular medical pages to see this week's list. Sizeofint (talk) 17:54, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
Performance enhancing agent listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Performance enhancing agent to be moved to Performance-enhancing substance. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 03:30, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
- To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.
Task force: Inducing Altered States of Consciousness
We're a group of ~ 7 people interested in methods to induce altered states of consciousness. This includes pharmacological methods like DNMA, PCP, caffeine, but also non-pharmacological methods like yoga, isolation tanks or meditation. Do you think this is the right place to open a task force to work on the related Wikipedia articles or should we form a new WikiProject? Thanks for your help! JananinaScott (talk) 11:02, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
- Hmm, good question. This seems like a topic that overlaps this project as well as WP:WikiProject Spirituality and WP:WikiProject Psychology. As the project currently stands this wouldn't be the best place for a task force. However, this project is fairly dead. I broadened its scope some months back which didn't seem to attract many new contributors. I would be open to broadening the scope of this project again to cover Altered States in general. Sizeofint (talk) 11:48, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
- It may make more sense to edit for a while before we decide to make a drastic change. In the meantime feel free to use this project as a discussion space. Sizeofint (talk) 11:55, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
- Okay, thanks. So, we'll open a new subgroup within your project and see how it goes. Just give us feedback if you think it's not the right place anymore. JananinaScott (talk) 09:42, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
- It may make more sense to edit for a while before we decide to make a drastic change. In the meantime feel free to use this project as a discussion space. Sizeofint (talk) 11:55, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
Performance-enhancing substance listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Performance-enhancing substance to be moved to Performance-enhancing substance. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 15:00, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
- To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.
Cannabis (drug) listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Cannabis (drug) to be moved to Cannabis as a drug. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 08:18, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
- To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.
Upcoming "420 collaboration"
 You are invited to participate in the upcoming 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. For more information about this campaign, and to learn how you can help improve Wikipedia, please visit the "420 collaboration" page. |
|---|
---Another Believer (Talk) 20:46, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
Legal status of psilocybin mushrooms listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Legal status of psilocybin mushrooms to be moved to Legality of psilocybin mushrooms. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 01:46, 8 June 2017 (UTC)
- To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.
Legal status of Salvia divinorum listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Legal status of Salvia divinorum to be moved to Legality of Salvia divinorum. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 02:00, 8 June 2017 (UTC)
- To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.
Legal status of Salvia divinorum in the United States listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Legal status of Salvia divinorum in the United States to be moved to Legality of Salvia divinorum in the United States. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 02:01, 8 June 2017 (UTC)
- To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.
Lysergic acid diethylamide listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Lysergic acid diethylamide to be moved to LSD. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 02:44, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
- To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.
War on Drugs listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for War on Drugs to be moved to War on drugs. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 18:16, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
- To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.
11-Hydroxy-THC listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for 11-Hydroxy-THC to be moved to 11-hydroxy-THC. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 09:46, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
- To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.
War on drugs listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for War on drugs to be moved to War on drugs. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 18:32, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
- To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.
Cannabis (drug) listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Cannabis (drug) to be moved to Marijuana. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 20:00, 19 December 2017 (UTC)
- To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.
Blunt (cannabis cigar) listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Blunt (cannabis cigar) to be moved to Blunt (cannabis). This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 13:30, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
- To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.
Tetrahydrocannabinol listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Tetrahydrocannabinol to be moved to THC. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 14:58, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
- To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.
Horrible, horrible gray death
We need an image of gray death. Maybe it would help people identify and avoid it. Anyone? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 19:37, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
Anyone? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 01:53, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
- Sorry, I personally don't have anything for that. --Tryptofish (talk) 15:19, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
- I'm actually happy to hear that, Tryptofish. Thanks, anyhow. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 18:27, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
- Me too, for both of us. --Tryptofish (talk) 20:34, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
- Me too, for both of us.
- I'm actually happy to hear that, Tryptofish. Thanks, anyhow. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 18:27, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
- Well, Tryptofish, it's good that they marketed it as gray death. The name probably puts a lot of people off. It would be far more popular had they presented it as 'pink joy' or something. Obviously their marketing people are rubbish. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 21:10, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
420 Collaboration
The 420 Collaboration to create and improve cannabis-related content runs through the month of April. WikiProject members are invited to participate. ---Another Believer (Talk) 01:43, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
Salvia divinorum
Salvia divinorum, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. AIRcorn (talk) 02:58, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
Electric smoking system listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Electric smoking system to be moved to Heat-not-burn tobacco product. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 14:03, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
- To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.
Request for information on WP1.0 web tool
Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.
We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
Heat-not-burn product listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Heat-not-burn product to be moved to Heated tobacco product. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 20:05, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
- To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.
Electric smoking system listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Electric smoking system to be moved to Heat-not-burn tobacco product. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 00:03, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
- To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.
Electric smoking system listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Electric smoking system to be moved to Heated tobacco product. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 01:18, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
- To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.
Electric smoking system listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Electric smoking system to be moved to Heat-not-burn product. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 21:32, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
- To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.
Electric smoking system listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Electric smoking system to be moved to Heat-not-burn product. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 00:18, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
- To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.
Heated tobacco product listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Heated tobacco product to be moved to Heated tobacco product. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 23:38, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
- To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.
Electric smoking system listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Electric smoking system to be moved to Heat-not-burn product. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 18:32, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
- To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.
Electric smoking system listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Electric smoking system to be moved to Heat-not-burn product. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 12:32, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
- To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.
War on drugs listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for War on drugs to be moved to American Drug War. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 12:48, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
- To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.
Psilocybin mushroom listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Psilocybin mushroom to be moved to Psilocybin mushrooms. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 14:31, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
- To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.
Mexican Drug War listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Mexican Drug War to be moved to Mexican drug war. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 00:47, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
- To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.
Hyoscine listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Hyoscine to be moved to Scopolamine. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 16:46, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
- To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.