Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cannabis/Collaboration

About the Collaboration
WikiProject Cannabis members, the Collaboration is a great way for us to work together to improve a specific article or direct our attention to one specific task at a time. Many other wikiprojects use this idea to improve key articles or complete a tedious task quickly. For example, we could decide to focus our attention on Medical cannabis, improving the article to the best of our ability within a short amount of time. Currently, there is no set/specific length of time (some project choose to do one per week or month). Other ways to improve the article and its coverage is to upgrade the Quality (from Start class to B class, for example), to nominate the article for Good or Featured status, to nominate a Did You Know fact, etc.

You are welcome to offer suggestions for future collaborations on the Collaboration page. The page also displays an archive of previous collaborations, including the dates, the article or task, as well as the result. The result could be one of the following, depending on how successful the collaboration was:


 * ✅ indicates the task was completed
 * indicates the task was not completed
 * indicates that a fact from the article appeared in the Did You Know section of the main page
 * indicates the article was upgraded to Start Class
 * indicates the article was upgraded to C Class
 * indicates the article was upgraded to B Class
 * indicates the article was upgraded to A Class
 * indicates the article was promoted to Good status
 * indicates the article was promoted to Featured status
 * – indicates the article was not upgraded

This legend is also on the collaboration page. Also, be sure to take a look at the templates used for the collaboration.
 * Placing WPCannabis Collaboration on the talk page of the current collaboration article produces the following:


 * Placing WPCannabis Past Collaboration on the talk page of past collaboration articles produces the following:

With this second template, the dates are filled in by adding the appropriate days, month(s) and year on the article's talk page. For example, placing "|October 27|November 11|2008" within the template would generate the following: "This article was a Collaboration of WikiProject Cannabis during October 27–November 11, 2008."

I hope this information helps, and I hope project members choose to participate. Remember that a little bit of help from a lot of people goes a long way. Feel free to post comments, questions, or concerns here, and you are always welcome to use this talk page to discuss current collaborations. Thanks! -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 21:57, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Unassessed articles
Our first collaboration deals with assigning Quality and Importance ratings to ALL articles associated with the project. Category:Unassessed Cannabis articles contains a list of articles that have not received a quality rating. If you have questions regarding the assessment process and ratings, be sure to check out our assessment page for information. Currently, there are 150 140  100 4 articles needing to be graded, so feel free to assist if you wish! -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 03:20, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Update: All but 4 articles have been rated on the Quality scale. The 4 without ratings are currently under discussion. The 3 cultivation articles are being merged to Cannabis cultivation, so the ratings will be irrelevant soon. The Alison Green article is likely to be deleted due to lack of notability requirements, so I am not bothering with a rating at this time. However, Category:Unknown-importance Cannabis articles contains 81 articles that have not yet received a rating on the Importance scale. Many of these are cannabinoids or chemistry/pharmacology-related articles, so I am not certain which ones are more important than others. Perhaps Kpstewart can be of some assistance here. -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 04:39, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Update: Due to the merge of the 3 cultivation articles and the deletion of the Alison Green article, ALL articles currently associated with WikiProject Cannabis now have Quality ratings. Just 73 articles still needing a rating on the Importance scale. Thank you so much for your hard work! Soon we can check off the collaboration and find a new article to improve. -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 17:02, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Morse v. Frederick
While there are still some articles requiring a rating on the Importance scale, our goal of rating ALL articles on the Quality scale was accomplished. I have marked the task as completed on the collaboration page--thank you to all who assisted with rating articles.

The current collaboration is Morse v. Frederick, an article about an interesting court case that is already pretty well put together. Our goal is to make any minor edits that are needed (spelling, grammar, etc.) and/or expand the article. I have actually nominated the article for Good status, but we can make any changes that are needed before or after it is reviewed. Hopefully we can come out of the collaboration with another Good article for the project! Feel free to discuss the collaboration here, or on the article's talk page. Thanks! -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 16:26, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Here is the link to the Good article nomination. Feel free to assist with improving the article. -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 23:17, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
 * If any group members are more familiar with law and court cases, your assistance with the aforementioned article would be greatly appreciated. The GA review started off good, but it turns out the article needs more work than I thought it would initially. I am more than willing to improve articles to the best of my ability, but I feel this one is a bit out of my element. In response to the suggestions made by Wehwalt, I have stated that I appreciate his assistance but that I do not feel I am able to get the article to GA status on my own. If you are willing to help, now is the time to do so. Otherwise the attempt at Good status will be unsuccessful (which is not too disappointing as the article was improved nonetheless). -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 00:14, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * A lot of work has been done on the Morse v. Frederick article, but I don't think it is going to make it to Good status, unfortunately. Just needed too much work. Looking to pick another cannabis-related article for the collaboration soon, so be sure to add any other articles you feel would make good collaborations for our group. -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 19:13, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Length of time for collaboration
Hoping to get some feedback here from other project members. Currently, I am just arbitrarily deciding when to pick a new collaboration based on when I feel a decent amount of time has passed and edits to the article have slowed. How would you feel about having set lengths of time for collaboration? Right now I am leaning towards two collaborations per month--one from the first day of the month to the 15th, and the other from the 15th to the last day of the month. That way, any project member can go ahead and pick a new collaboration on the 1st or 15th day of the month, and I won't have to pick articles arbitrarily. This will give other members power to choose articles they want the project to work on. All I ask is that the member making the update do all of the following:
 * 1) choose a new collaboration and update the top of the collaboration page to display the current collaboration
 * 2) update the 'Past collaborations' table (including the Improvement and Result columns)
 * 3) place the WPCannabis Past Collaboration template on the previous collaboration's talk page
 * 4) place the WPCannabis Collaboration template on the current collaboration's talk page

It is really quite a simple process, and I am really just trying to get other project members involved. If you have any questions or comments, feel free to post below. Any feedback is appreciated. Or, feel free to support or oppose the two-week time interval below. Thanks! -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 01:37, 13 August 2009 (UTC)


 * 1) Support -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 01:37, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Pineapple Express collaboration
I realize the article for Pineapple Express is not at the top of our priority list, but please keep in mind that the article is one of the most-visited pages associated with our project. In that sense, the article deserves more attention. I have asked members of WikiProject Films and WikiProject Comedy to assist with improving the article, and I am hoping that we can upgrade the article to Good status by the end of the month. A member of WP Films left suggestions here regarding how to improve the article. Feel free to contribute in any way possible--it would be great if we could add another Good article to our project! Thanks! -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 16:13, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, not much improvement has been made to the article. I had family in town this past week, so hopefully I can get around to working on the article soon. Again, I am trying to encourage WikiProject Films, Comedy, and Cannabis members to improve the article, hoping it will eventually reach Good status for the benefit of all three projects. If interested, feel free to contribute! -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 20:04, 24 October 2009 (UTC)