Talk:Cannabis in California/Archive 1

Merge with Drug policy of California?
First of all, the article title does not indicate that it is related to California. Secondly, this information could probably all go under the Cannabis section of the Drug policy of California article, which still needs to be expanded greatly to include information about other controlled substances. I preferred the individual articles for the pieces of legislation, although even those are probably unnecessary unless the laws are actually passed. I think, in the end, Drug policy of California should be expanded, and eventually Cannabis in California will be created (much like Cannabis in Oregon). -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 02:40, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Now that I think about it, I suggest renaming this article "Cannabis in California", and letting this article discuss the history of cannabis in California, including legislation, trends, public opinion, proposed laws, medical marijuana, dispensaries, etc. Technically, this information could go on the "Drug policy of California" page, but that article will eventually contain details about other drugs and controlled substances (not just cannabis). See Controlled substances in Oregon and Cannabis in Oregon for examples. -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 02:46, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Update: I went ahead and moved the existing article to "Cannabis in California", which can be used to describe the history of marijuana in the state, including the medical marijuana program, the 2010 initiatives, etc. Hopefully the article can be expanded soon. -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 21:08, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Complaints (retitled)
There are many references to expired issues in this article. They are written as though they are present issues. However, they no longer reflect the current situation. In other words, the article discusses that past as though it was the present.
 * This article is not current

There are duplications of the same information in multiple sections of this article. There is no coherent organization. Therefore is should be tagged for rewrite.
 * This article is grossly repetitive


 * More Professional Tone

The current tone of this piece is somewhat unprofessional as well as biased in some areas. --Airliners321 (talk) 06:19, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Rewrite needed
The current article is kind of a mess. I don't know if I have it in me to do a total re-write, but I will note that Cannabis in Oregon is laid out and structured a lot better and should be a good model.

I'm reluctant to tackle it a week before the election since the issue might change dramatically soon, but it's also a high-visibility article that's really poor quality and disjointed for how much readership it gets. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 22:09, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Update Article with New Laws and Clarifications...
1. Under the "Decriminalization" header, what are the new policies regarding Prop 64 (AUMA) and when would they be implemented? I believe this topic could be updated, improved and elaborated upon through further investigation of the actual California Official Voter Information Guide. The lack of legislative description surrounding "decriminalization" needs sufficient evidence to support defined decriminalization.

2. Referring to the "Medical Usage" header, Is there more medically-relevant information that could be added to this part for enhanced clarification? I believe there needs to be more transparent data averrable from undisputed, medically certified sources that could provide further insight to marijuana's potential medical usages. Perhaps conveying some published statistical studies regarding the focused usage of medical cannabis could alleviate the ambiguity surrounding defined medical usage. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trevor Jenkins (talk • contribs) 20:54, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cannabis in California. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100112181026/http://norml.com/index.cfm?wtm_view=&Group_ID=4525 to http://www.norml.com/index.cfm?wtm_view=&Group_ID=4525

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 06:51, 30 July 2017 (UTC)