Talk:Cannabis in Kansas

The official name on Wikipedia is Cannabis
Cannabis (drug) From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia "Marijuana" redirects here. For other uses, see Marijuana (disambiguation). It is a plant and plants are known by their species name, which is cannabis.

The above was written by Lipsquid (talk) 04:07, 6 May 2016 (UTC) immediately after his change to the text which I describe below. --Potguru (talk) 04:15, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

KANSAS defines marijuana, not cannabis

 * In Kansas, like most many of the states in the USA, marijuana is defined as a portion of the cannabis plant. Specifically:
 * "(j) "Marijuana" means all parts of all varieties of the plant Cannabis whether growing or not, the seeds thereof, the resin extracted from any part of the plant and every compound, manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture or preparation of the plant, its seeds or resin. "Marijuana" does not include the mature stalks of the plant, fiber produced from the stalks, oil or cake made from the seeds of the plant, any other compound, manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture or preparation of the mature stalks, except the resin extracted therefrom, fiber, oil or cake or the sterilized seed of the plant which is incapable of germination." source: http://kslegislature.org/li_2012/b2011_12/statute/021_000_0000_chapter/021_057_0000_article/021_057_0001_section/021_057_0001_k/


 * As demonstrated, the laws in Kansas govern marijuana, not cannabis. --Potguru (talk) 04:47, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

May 2016 Marijuana Vs Cannabis use of terminology dispute
Easier to discuss rather than serial reverts, why not gain more opinions before making such drastic changes? I am no expert on cannabis and have no ax to grind, but one state's definition of cannabis vs marijuana doesn't matter to wikipedia guidelines which are clear in that we use proper names for plants. Please show me the definition from a reliable source of the distinction between the two. Lipsquid (talk) 04:19, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
 * I strongly encourage you to read the already provided references in the page. You will quickly see that my edits are correctly reflected in the source material where the authors all use the word marijuana.  There is no source to support any theory that "The Kansas Attorney General stated that he would sue the city if the measure passed, arguing the city does not have legal authority to reduce cannabis penalties." as your revert would have us believe.  He simply never said that.  Also your revert destroyed the meaning of one non-sense sentence back to it's previous unreadable form here:  "the city of Wichita voted to decriminalize cannabis municipally".  I propose, as I am an expert on the subject matter, that you revert your edit to my carefully thought out edits and improve the article by providing sources that back your contention... instead of some theory on word use.  Thank you --Potguru (talk) 04:24, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
 * If there is the obvious distinction you mention, why does marijuana redirect to cannabis? If you change the main article and your argument holds water, I will gladly revert my edits.  I have no opinion on the matter other than Wikipedia be consistent.  Maybe the main article needs to be fixed first.  Cannabis  Lipsquid (talk) 04:30, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
 * This is a Kansas specific article. In Kansas there is no such thing as cannabis as you propose.  You are not alone in your confusion many people think that cannabis = marijuana.  But believing a thing and truth are often different, as in this case.  Marijuana is a PORTION of the cannabis plant.  Using the argument "wikipedia says such and such" is not proof of anything.  A dictionary would be a better start and more importantly, in this region specific article, it is important we stick to facts.  Again, I encourage you to revert to my edits as each was carefully considered before it was changed.  I actually read the sources.  When you take the time to do the same, you will see I am right. --Potguru (talk) 04:38, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Also, feel free to correct any grammatical errors my revert caused, I will certainly not challenge any changes that improve readability. Lipsquid (talk) 04:31, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Clearly you should be the one to make that edit, not me. I already made it one time and you changed it without consideration.  --Potguru (talk) 04:38, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
 * I am a nice guy, I don't want to argue. Wikipedia can call it cannabis, marijuana, weed, pot, whatever, as long as it is consistent.  Cannabis - Marijuana, I don't care.  What I do care about is people who make a mess by changing things that deviate from already consistent standards.  cannabis, Legality of cannabis by U.S. jurisdiction, Medical cannabis, Legal_and_medical_status_of_cannabis, Legal history of cannabis in the United States, Decriminalization of non-medical cannabis in the United States, Cannabis_in_California, Cannabis in Oregon, Cannabis in Louisiana.  I just want consistency and I think you are making a mistake.  You should gain consensus and make it a big project to change all of these pages, if they are indeed wrong. I strongly suggest you make an RfC on the dispute in the context of all of the Cannabis articles.  Again, I am no expert.  I am definitely not saying you are wrong, but I am saying how you are going about this is wrong.  Lipsquid (talk) 04:57, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
 * I appreciate your comments, really I do. I would like to point out though that I do not accept marijuana and cannabis to be interchangeable terms.  They have different meanings in this case as one is a plant and the other a "portion of" a plant and in this case the state uses the term marijuana for that portion of the cannabis plant.  I am using the sources as my guide, not just changing the term willy-nilly. --Potguru (talk) 13:01, 6 May 2016 (UTC)


 * The state was behind in the wording ". The penalties for hashish and marijuana concentrates are the same as those for marijuana."....that said the US in general are  doing better with new acts like Missouri Cannabis Restoration and Protection Act.....soon they will all be using the proper terms all over. -- Moxy (talk) 11:24, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
 * That is an awesome initiative and I hope more states adopt similar wording. I am finding the opposite though, that states are more and more likely to use the term "Marijuana" to define a "portion of cannabis" and hemp to define the other portion.  To be fair to all I will strive to author an article about Missouri's "Cannabis Restoration and Protection Act" based on the language in the draft and references.  (Which I really like).  Thanks for pointing it out Moxy! (Thank you too,  Lipsquid!) --Potguru (talk) 12:44, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
 * This does not change that the word Cannabis is the standard and you need to either change the standard across the board, which requires an RfC and a whole lot of work, or keep with the standard. Lipsquid (talk) 15:16, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
 * For what it's worth I think it effectively demonstrates there is no "standard". Cannabis is a plant and marijuana and hemp are portions of that plant.  It may be helpful to think of it in terms of alcohol.  While hops is a major constituent of beer, hops is not beer... it only represents a portion of beer.  So if Kansas regulates hops, but not beer, then the article should be about hops.  Just the same as we refer to Hemp as a portion of the cannabis plant.  Notice there is no redirect from hemp -> cannabis.  So the idea of a "standard word" describing cannabis is effectively disproved. --Potguru (talk) 13:12, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
 * On Wikipedia it is a standard, please change the article back. All the other state marijuana laws are cannabis.  he plant is the cannabis plant, Marijuana, which I am sure you know is just a Spanish slang term "Mary Jane" redirects to Cannabis.  Please undo the mess you are making. Lipsquid (talk) 17:19, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
 * By way of example your argument must not be correct. If it were since hemp is also cannabis, then hemp and all occurrences of the word must redirect to cannabis which is not the case. --Potguru (talk) 02:22, 8 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Its not a good idea to propagate wrong terms in the title.....we should use the parent academic English term "Cannabis" for the title not a slang term and explain in a "Definition" section or anywhere the terms used in this case. E.g  of this  convention is seen with Legal history of cannabis in Canada not named after  "Marihuana for Medical Purposes Regulations" or "definition used by the Supreme Court of Canada. We should be using the acadamic English term over the Spanish slang term for the title. --Moxy (talk) 00:27, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
 * You are looking at a page after the edits (which the title reflects) were reverted. When the page was moved the content all read "marijuana".--Potguru (talk) 02:19, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Not sure how that matters...the title should be the norm all over..as with other articles on cannabis e.gs. above.--Moxy (talk) 02:58, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Sure, that would be true if the article were about cannabis, but it isn't; the article is about the way marijuana is regulated in Kansas. --Potguru (talk) 15:20, 8 May 2016 (UTC)


 * The topic is about cannabis that they call 'marijuana. Lets give an  example the other way...say Kansas used the word benzoylmethylecgonine in its law ...we would use  Cocaine in Kansas for a title.....for the same but opposite  reason here....that is the term used all over. Must remember Marihuana is a slang term that does not have one simple definition...where Cannabis has no confusion on its meaning. --Moxy (talk) 15:27, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Cannabis is a plant. Clearly defined in wikipedia.  Marijuana, however, is a portion of the cannabis plant.  This article is about how marijuana is regulated in Kansas, not how cannabis is regulated in kansas.  Your example is not correct because benzoylmethylecgonine = coke whereas marijuana does not equal cannabis. --Potguru (talk) 15:51, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
 * No that is simply wrong! They are using the word marijuana to refer to  the cannabis  plant they call marijuana plants(Kan. Stat. Ann. §§ 21-5703 & 21-5705.) ....thus they are using the word in its broad sense as seen here. its is not used for simply a portion of the plant.--Moxy (talk) 15:58, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Really confused about why you state so emphatically that I am wrong. The law you point to reads, very clearly:
 * Marijuana" means all parts of all varieties of the plant Cannabis whether growing or not, the seeds thereof, the resin extracted from any part of the plant and every compound, manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture or preparation of the plant, its seeds or resin. "Marijuana" does not include the mature stalks of the plant, fiber produced from the stalks, oil or cake made from the seeds of the plant, any other compound, manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture or preparation of the mature stalks, except the resin extracted therefrom, fiber, oil or cake or the sterilized seed of the plant which is incapable of germination.
 * I bolded the reason that marijuana is NOT = cannabis. Seems pretty clear. --Potguru (talk) 16:39, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
 * It doesnt seem to me that you had a consensus to move this page either Potguru. So why was my moving disruptive and yours not? ♫ RichardWeiss talk contribs 05:53, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Your move is war editing Edit_warring whereas my move was a bold edit. All the above was written AFTER I moved the page.  As an old hat editor you should certainly understand the difference.  Please revert to my previous move until we achieve concensus --Potguru (talk) 05:56, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
 * It isnt edit warring as I moved it to a new title, a better one IMO as it makes it clear we are referring to the US state. Accusing me of edit warring isnt helping your cause one bit right now, there is clearly a lot of unhappiness with your single-minded campaign to use the word marijuana rather than cannabis. You arent the first but another in a long line of editors and this has been rejected on repeated occasions. Instead of trying to gain consensus you are trying to force your view on other editors. You seemed gleeful that nobody could fix your move, you thought, and now you see it isnt so you are just spitting angry. I really suggest you get some editing experience and come back to the topic in 6 months time. before you get a topic ban. ♫ RichardWeiss talk contribs 06:08, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
 * You moved it to a new title after I moved it to a new title. The definition of edit warring is "An edit war occurs when editors who disagree about the content of a page repeatedly override each other's contributions."  This is exactly what you did whereas I followed the important next sentence. "Editors engaged in a dispute should reach consensus or pursue dispute resolution rather than edit warring." I made a change and then I tried to gain concensus and you moved the page without having achieved that concensus.  Then you make a false assumption that my edits are in bad faith.  Please try harder to follow the policy in wikipedia as I do.  --Potguru (talk) 07:17, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
 * You continue to ignore all other editors while claiming others and not yourself are being disruptive. You have been here 5 minutes but here you are telling me to follow policy. Well actually I do that better than you already. To claim I engaged in edit warring whereas you were being bold, even though the consensus is with me and not you, makes you an im´possible edtor to work with. We are not going anywhere here, you either change or sooner or later you will be topic banned. You are generating a lot of interest now, includng form me. And consensus is spelt with 2 Ss. ♫ RichardWeiss talk contribs 14:03, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Proposed merge with Cannabis in Kansas
Editor incorrectly moved the Cannabis in Kansas page to this page, which is not per Wikipedia standard and with zero discussion on the talk page. Lipsquid (talk) 17:28, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Boldly moving an article is encouraged at wikipedia. --Potguru (talk) 02:14, 8 May 2016 (UTC)


 * People are complaining, so move it back and gain consensus. That is also encouraged behavior at Wikipedia.  Lipsquid (talk) 18:21, 8 May 2016 (UTC)