Wikipedia:Peer review/Cannabis rescheduling/archive1

Cannabis rescheduling

Interesting piece, that I would like to revise so it can become a Featured Article. Thc420 07:17, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

• A topical comment: The sidebar is huge. I would suggest either restyling it so it's less obtrustive (I can do that if you want me to) or making it a separate article. I haven't found any other major issues with the article on my first read. – flamurai (t) 07:36, Feb 8, 2005 (UTC)
  • Kudos to flamurai for making the sidebars look awesome! 69.243.41.28 08:28, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
    • I agree! Wow! - Ta bu shi da yu 23:57, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Some pictures would help. Also, IMHO you might consider restructuring the article. What I would want to see if I opened the page, would be 1)background 2)Arguements for and against rescheduling 3)Process needed for resceduling 4)History of attempts to reschedule in chronological order (not split to legislative and administrative). Sayeth 16:18, Feb 8, 2005 (UTC)
  • Hmm, interesting idea. I have seen timelines before like what you are talking about. See The History of Medical Marijuana, Rotten.com timeline, History of Medical Marijuana Research. The latter seems to be the most relevant to this article. It shouldn't be too hard to merge the Administrative and Legislative aspects into one timeline. 205.217.105.2 21:05, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Okay, I reorganized it. Radracer 16:45, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • In response to your question regarding what pictures to use, if you can't find pictures of Congressional hearings, protesters marching for medicinal marijuana or legalization would make an easily findable illustration - use search terms on Google like "Prop. 215 California protest" or do a search on indymedia.org for "marijuana legalization". I was able to find several pics on the atlanta.indymedia.org website, but I couldn't find their copyright policy. Sayeth 22:36, Feb 8, 2005 (UTC)
    • Yeah, I've gotten burned by copyright issues in the past. Prop. 215 might not be too relevant to rescheduling, since rescheduling is a federal issue. Hmm, what do you think? 205.217.105.2 15:11, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • I wonder whether there is too much overlap between:
    • • cannabis rescheduling
      • Controlled Substances Act
      • medical marijuana
      • Legal issues of cannabis
    • After writing the former, I noticed that the CSA article had a lot of the same info about the rescheduling process. 205.217.105.2 15:11, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • I found some pics: [1], of a lady getting arrested for barricading the doors of the DEA, and then there's one here [2] of a joint and Marinol pill side by side; unfortunately, the resolution is poor. Let me know if you find anything better, thanks, Rad Racer 19:53, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• The article is all about the situation in the United States. Various other countries have tried different approaches to the classification of cannabis. Therefore, the article suffers from limited geographical bias. The big fix would be to make the US information one part in a larger, more comprehensive article. The quick fix would be an honest renaming to Cannabis rescheduling (US). Gareth Hughes 11:36, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • It would be interesting to cover international drug scheduling (i.e. under the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs), since that is an oft-neglected issue. Rad Racer 12:37, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)