Talk:Cannabis (drug)

Requested move, additional comments, 2024

A comment on the above Requested move... this is like at least the seventh time people have requested a move to marijuana since I last mentioned this continuous move requesting issue back in 2006 --Talk:Cannabis_(drug)/Archive_3#Requested_move,_additional_comments, when it had been happening over and over again. Can we not put up some sort of sticky notice in the talk page that doesn't get archived, with a list of all the requests to move in the past that failed to pass with a notice to please stop requesting move/rename on this article without reading all the previous request to moves and why the request didn't pass, or maybe we can just keep a few really, really good reasons not to request a move to marijuana sticky in the talk page, without archiving them, or is everyone really happy to have this come up again and again? --Thoric (talk) 05:10, 20 March 2024 (UTC) Btw, here are a few of them:

• Talk:Cannabis_(drug)/Archive_3#Requested_move
• Talk:Cannabis_(drug)/Archive_5#Naming_of_Article
• Talk:Cannabis_(drug)/Archive_6#Cannabis_is_not_a_drug
• Talk:Cannabis_(drug)/Archive_9#Requested_move_to_"Marijuana"
• Talk:Cannabis_(drug)/Archive_10#Common_name?
• Talk:Cannabis_(drug)/Archive_12#Requested_move_19_December_2017 --Thoric (talk) 05:20, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

I think we need to put this in an FAQ at this point. The discussion/request has happened too many times already. Turtletennisfogwheat (talk) 01:21, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

Yes agree.... could also make an edit notice. Moxy🍁 02:07, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

I've added it Turtletennisfogwheat (talk) 09:31, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! Thoric (talk) 14:57, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

Error in facts of legalization

Article states "In Australia, it is legalized only in the Australian Capital Territory." This is incorrect as it has only been decriminalised. This is mentioned at https://www.act.gov.au/cannabis/home#:~:text=Q.,put%20through%20the%20justice%20system. in the Q and A section. should be changed to "In Australia, it is illegal, with it only being decriminalised in the Australian Capital Territory." GoldRequiem64 (talk) 07:49, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Etymology

I suggest someone with the knowhow to utilize the Wiktionary page below to rewrite the etymology section on this. Please do not try to use a new age book on spirituality for the source, use credible sources, such as those cited on the page below.

https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/%CE%BA%CE%AC%CE%BD%CE%BD%CE%B1%CE%B2%CE%B9%CF%82#Ancient_Greek Tommygunn7886 (talk) 18:06, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

Please stop edit warring. You are removing reliable sources citing subject matter experts. Wiktionary, tertiary sources like online dictionaries, and etymonline.com (a SPS), are not reliable sources. A Rainbow Footing It (talk) 21:47, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

Incorrect etymology

The sources given are tertiary sources from popular press, they are not scholarly. Please consider my changes to the page below using a credible source.

Borrowed from Latin cannabis, from Greek κάνναβις, of ultimately unknown origin Ari Feldstein (talk) 17:51, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Not sure anyone thinks Cambridge University Simon & Schuster and Hamad Bin Khalifa University are popular press or tertiary sources publications. The source presented here is a tertiary source. Basics about types of sources can be seen at "Primary, Secondary, and Tertiary Sources". University of Minnesota Crookston. Retrieved July 31, 2024. Moxy🍁 18:04, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

I see you did not attend university. Simon and Schuster is 100% considered popular press.

https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/library/evaluating/resource-types/books

Popular Press

"As the name suggests, popular presses sell popular books; books meant to entertain. Even when they publish non-fiction books, they generally are not considered scholarly, because their audience is the general public. Like academic presses, they employ people to review and edit books before they are published. But their books are not peer reviewed and generally are not considered scholarly.

Examples: Penguin, Random House, HarperCollins, Simon & Schuster, etc."

Also not seeing where you are getting the source for Hamad Bin Khalifa University? I am not seeing anything published from there being used as a source. Ari Feldstein (talk) 18:18, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Also, accordingly, the textbook from Cambridge University which was used as a source is considered a tertiary source according to the website you just cited by the way. Ari Feldstein (talk) 18:20, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Actually I am emeritus from Canada (a place with a much better education system). You will have to get others input at this point as I cant find the entry in the source you provided to rebut anything about what the source says..... Can only state it's not widely referenced in anything. Moxy🍁 18:53, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Emeritus yet you contradicted yourself with the tertiary source website which stated that textbooks(the Cambridge source) are tertiary. Also you did not know Simon and Schuster was popular press. Somehow I just don't believe you. Btw I went to an Ivy League. Ari Feldstein (talk) 19:02, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

I shouldn't have to clarify this, but I learned pilpul as a kid, I went to AND graduated from an Ivy League University, before you try to make a snide remark. Ari Feldstein (talk) 19:03, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Let's keep talking in one place that discusses sources not any fake Internet personality Talk:Cannabis#No_scholarly_consensus_on_etymologyMoxy🍁 19:52, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Fake internet personality? Says the one claiming to be a professor, yet you think Simon and Schuster books are peer reviewed. Was Arnold's encyclopedia of modern bodybuilding a scholarly peer reviewed source? Ari Feldstein (talk) 22:07, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

If the sniping round of this discussion is complete, can we discuss etymology? I frankly don't see that either position is helpful to the encyclopaedia. How does the fact that the word was [b]orrowed from Latin cannabis, from Greek κάνναβις conflict with the article's statement that it's of Scythian root? I'll admit that the existing wording leaves something to be desired, since it seems to imply that the term came directly from Scythian whilst simultaneously being filtered through two Semitic languages (Assyrian through Hebrew then, presumably, to Greek).

Regardless, it seems to have gotten into Greek via Herodotus as κάνναβις. Can we agree so far? If so, @Ari Feldstein, are you saying that you object to the deeper root and want to leave it as if it had sprung fully formed into Greek like Athena from her's pappy's forehead? @Moxy, are you objecting to adding the Beekes cite that at least reinforces the thread after Herodotus got it from Scythian with a side order of Hebrew? Do either of you, or anyone else reading this, have something definitive (or at least persuasive) on the Scythian/Assyrian/Hebrew/Greek muddle? If the answers to all of the above are negative, how about, "Cannabis is a word of Scythian origin. In Assyrian, cannabis was known as qunubu, a word adapted into Hebrew as kaneh bosem. Herodotus rendered it into Greek as κάνναβις, styled cannabis in Latin, from which the term enters a variety of modern languages, including English."

Before worrying about correcting the etymology on the Cannabis (drug) page, perhaps the Etymology of cannabis page should be the place to start? --Thoric (talk) 19:44, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

References

Partial and incorrect pharmacology mentioned

Cannabidiol is 5HT1A agonist. It’s not mentioned anywhere in the page. Also, CBD is CB1 receptor “negative allosteric modulator” and not “antagonist”. Please correct it.

Nowhere NMDA antagonist effect of cannabis is mentioned here. THC is a weak indirect NMDA antagonist. Can somebody add this thing here under pharmacology section ? Prasunkatiyar (talk) 12:52, 17 September 2024 (UTC)