Talk:Marijuana (word)/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

The page abuse

a moron just put "smoke piffall day" or something like that. i deleted it, but be on the lookout for some page abuse —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.236.120.38 (talk) 22:04, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

please don't refer to other editors as morons, wp:agf. riffic (talk) 16:28, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

use of narcotic

the use of narcotic in the definition is contentious and not very factual. I'd consider it better to be described as psychoactive, as in the Cannabis_(drug) article. As well it would serve to better clarify the origin of the term, Hemp should remain in this article. riffic (talk) 15:46, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Removed "narcotic". I also corrected the link to the specific plant cannabis sativa. I don't know that we should link hemp; the Wikipedia article on hemp is on the actual fiber, which is never called "marijuana".--Cúchullain t/c 17:30, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
hemp is linked on the opening paragraph of cannabis sativa so I'll concede that. riffic (talk) 19:28, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

non-dictionary sources for the etymology of "marijuana"/"marihuana"

I suck at putting together decent prose from sources and would like some help with this, but here goes a couple that seem to indicate the history of the term: http://www.thenewsherald.com/articles/2009/04/07/news/doc49dba57013a56202252606.txt (opinion piece, The News-Herald (Southgate, Michigan); http://www.drugwarrant.com/articles/why-is-marijuana-illegal/ (DrugWarRant). More coming... riffic (talk) 11:15, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

book sources - Hemp: American history revisited: the plant with a divided history, Robert Deitch, Algora Publishing, 2003 ISBN 0875862055, 9780875862057 pp 86-87,115-117,143-154; Marijuana medicine: a world tour of the healing and visionary powers of cannabis, Christian Rätsch, Christian Ratsch, Inner Traditions / Bear & Company, 2001 ,ISBN 0892819332, 9780892819331; and more.. just do a google book search for "word marihuana" or "word marijuana", lots to compile from this. riffic (talk) 11:28, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
I can help with this, if you find some more sources. Dictionaries are useful, but they don't establish that the word itself is notable outside of the thing the word describes - dictionaries contain every word. I looked at the links you provided, and I don't think they're going to cut it as far as reliable sources go. The first one, especially, is an opinion column, and the information contradicts what appears in the OED.--Cúchullain t/c 12:22, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
it might be opinion, yes, but there is a lot of fact in it. Woodward's original testimony is public record as well. riffic (talk) 12:47, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Opinion columns and the like can only be used to cite opinions, they can't be used to cite facts, as per WP:RS. And in the case of that first column, I don't think the author is notable enough that we should include him. He also appears to be wrong on the history of the word (which is what matters here); according to the OED "marijuana", "marihuana", etc., are attested in English as early as 1874, far too early for Anslinger et al to have introduced it. But at any rate, I've found a few sources on Google Books, which I'll try to get in here when I have some time.--Cúchullain t/c 17:31, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
OED link is behind a paywall, any chance I can see an excerpt? thanks riffic (talk) 19:20, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

No problem. Here's the selected quotations given by the OED for "Marijuana" as a plant:

1874 H. H. BANCROFT Wild Tribes vi. 633 The bride's parents then send round to the houses of their friends a bunch of mariguana, a narcotic herb, which signifies that all are to meet together at the bride's father's on the next night. 1907 A. B. LYONS Plant Names (ed. 2) 511 s.v. Cannabis a., Add Syn[onym] Marihuana (Mex.). 1934 R. E. CARRADINI Narcotics & Youth Today 1 In this classification [of narcotic drugs] should be included..Cannabis Indica, popularly known as Indian hemp or hashish, and the native plant, mariahuana. 1934 Jrnl. Amer. Med. Assoc. 21 July 212 On appeal to the Supreme Court of Utah, Navaro contended that the term ‘mariguana’, as used in the statute, signified a plant, not a drug. 1959 Encounter Oct. 56/2 The land where the marihuana grows. 1973 Daily Tel. 4 July 4 Nepal is to ban the growing of marijuana and poppies and the production of cannabis and opium. 1991 Hawaii June 79/3 Pakalolo growers..cultivate marijuana patches in upcountry Maui.

And here's the quotations for "marijuana" as a drug:

1874 H. H. BANCROFT Wild Tribes vi. 633 The meeting is inaugurated by smoking; then they chew mariguana, during which time all preliminaries of the marriage are settled. 1894 Scribner's Mag. May 596/2 [The] ‘toloachi’, [and] the ‘mariguan’,..are used by discarded women for the purpose of wreaking a terrible revenge upon recreant lovers. 1918 Jrnl. Amer. Med. Assoc. 21 Dec. 2094/1 The symptoms mentioned..as being produced by smoking Mara Huiwane or marajuana are similar to those produced by the mescal plant. 1923 W. SMITH Little Tigress 102 The cockroach is unable to stagger around any more because he has no more marijuana to smoke. Marijuana is a form of drug that brings false heart to the user. 1927 Amer. Speech 3 37 The tobacco of the Turkish coffee-houses has been replaced in Mexico by marihuana, the native variety of hashish. 1935 J. STEINBECK Tortilla Flat xiv. 246 His eyes were as wide and pained as the eyes of one who smokes marihuana. 1944 R. A. MOORE Textbk. Pathol. lix. 657 After long-continued use of marihuana there is mental deterioration. 1952 M. MCCARTHY Groves of Academe (1953) ii. 19 On one occasion, even, marijuana had been smoked on the steps of the gymnasium. 1968 Times 19 Dec. 4/6 Basic findings are that..subjects who have not smoked marihuana before do not have strong subjective experiences, even after strong doses. 1979 A. GINSBERG Coll. Poems (1984) 721 Marijuana rots your brain like it says in the papers, insists on the telly? 1983 ‘J. LE CARRÉ’ Little Drummer Girl (1984) iii. 67 They would lounge together in sullen council, smoking marihuana and drinking retsina at thirty drachmas a half-litre. 1996 Nature 14 Nov. 95/1 Voters in California and Arizona last week passed laws approving the medical use of marijuana. 2007 R. ROOM in D. Nutt et al. Drugs & Future xi. 347/1 Health damage is..less from eating marijuana than from smoking it.

For both definitions, the earliest quotation is the 1874 quote from H. H. Bancroft. According to the bibliography, the work in question is "Wild Tribes", the first volume of his work The native races of the Pacific states of North America. Amusingly, the 1923 quote from W. Smith's Little Tigress is referring to "La Cucaracha", showing that that was known in English by that time as well.--Cúchullain t/c 20:12, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

The OED has more interesting things to say about the word. Under the drug definition, they note: "The currency of the word increased greatly in the United States in the 1930s in the context of the debate over the use of the drug, the term being preferred as a more exotic alternative to the familiar words hemp and cannabis." This is reiterated in this book, which adds that some people have argued the promotion of marihuana was specifically by opponents of the drug, who wanted to stigmatize it with a "foreign-sounding name". Still, it is clear the name was well-established in English before that time. All very interesting.--Cúchullain t/c 20:32, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
established, but not very popular, nonetheless a source of confusion for the time period. I am getting inconsistent google news archive results now, but it seems there is a lot more hits for "hemp" or "cannabis" or even "hashish" than "marihuana" or "marijuana" or even "mariguana" until a certain time period. riffic (talk) 21:21, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
I have found a rather lengthy paper exploring the possible origins of the word Marihuana. The Mysterious Origins of the Word ‘Marihuana’ by Alan Piper. It provides some interesting comparisons with a possible Chinese origin. It also gives the different spellings and the first time that spelling was recorded.--Aspro (talk) 16:48, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Article Similarity

Isn't this just another version of the "Cannabis (etymology)" page? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabis_%28etymology%29

Cannabis (as a drug) is the same as marijuana, so why do the 2 get different pages? 

-A'mous  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.107.149.65 (talk) 15:04, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
Because they are two different words with different origins. Tisane talk/stalk 15:11, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

"Don't see that the Piper source is reliable"?

I could be misunderstanding WP:RS, but I see Piper (2005) as a scholarly study in a reliable source. Several hundred Wikipedia articles cite references in Sino-Platonic Papers. Would you please explain your opinion? Keahapana (talk) 23:30, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

I don't think everything that Sino-Platonic Papers publishes is necessarily reliable. It is put out by the University of Pennsylvania, but it's not a peer-reviewed journal; by its own description it specifically prints "unconventional or controversial" work by "younger, not well established, scholars and independent authors". Obviously not everything it puts out is fringe, but it's hardly something we should assume to be reliable. In this case, the author, Alan Piper, does not claim any particular credentials in linguistics or another relevant field that would make him necessarily reliable; he has a bachelor's in modern arts. And his review of the literature is obviously wrong based on other sources given here; according to the OED there is a reference - in English - from 1873, which one of your own links appeared to verify. Conceivably there are earlier references in Spanish as well.
Essentially, I think including this paper gives far to much weight to its claims, especially since it was superceding a claim from the OED on the word's etymology.Cúchullain t/c 00:56, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
On another note I imagine that so many Wikipedia articles cite Sino-Platonic Papers not because those works are reliable, but because the series publishes on the web under the Creative Commons license, making it much easier to find for Wikipedia editors than a journal they'd have to go to the library to find.Cúchullain t/c 00:56, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for explaining your reasoning. I've been reading SPP since the 80s and haven't seen anything that resembles WP:FRINGE, including Piper's article, which cites over seventy academic references.

Clearly, the etymology of marijuana is uncertain, but apparently, the OED citiation of mallihuan is based on a canard. According to Martin Booth, Harry J. Anslinger invented this "etymology" as anti-drug propaganda, with *mallihuan or *malli-a-huan "prisoner" meant to imply "an addict".

An authority on Nahuatl linguistics rejects the marijuana borrowing from mallihuan.

  • Jason D. Haugen (2009), "Borrowed Borrowings: Nahuatl Loan Words in English", Lexis, p. 94.

I suggest that we correct the article to mention Anslinger coining *mallihuan, and include the Piper reference. At minimum, something like, "Other etymological proposals include Spanish, Chinese, or Quechua."

Also, in the absence of any other sections, should we delete the current "History" heading? Keahapana (talk) 22:15, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

I don't think the Piper article belongs in the article, for the reasons I gave above. Piper is not an authority in linguistics or another relevant field, and publishing in that journal doesn't automatically confer authority. However, the article will still be useful for finding other sources for the topic.
Both the Booth and especially the Haugen sources look solid to me, and there's no problem in using Haugen to contradict the OED. One note though: Booth doesn't claim that Anslinger invented the "mallihuan" etymology, only that he used and promoted it. And it's the Haugen source that rejects the etymology, but not on the grounds that it was invented by Anslinger.--Cúchullain t/c 19:09, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
I want to clarify why I think Martin Booth should be considered reliable here. He's a novelist and his book is a pop history treatment, but he's cited on the subject of the history of drugs in several academic publications I found, for example[1][2][3].--Cúchullain t/c 19:24, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Yes, this source is useful, not only for this article's editors but also its future readers. To my knowledge, Piper (2005) is the only linguistic study of the word marijuana; and while it may not meet the golden ideal (expert-written, peer-reviewed) it is the best available resource. As a compromise, perhaps we could add it as an external link.

You are correct, Booth doesn't say Anslinger invented this pseudo-etymology, but "attempted to historically link the word marijuana to the Aztec Indians of Mexico." I just happened across these two refs when searching for mallihuan, and temporarily parked them here for the purpose of discussion. Reefer Madness (1998 book) (p. 20) cites this mallihuan hypothesis from the papers of Harry J. Anslinger. Perhaps you or another editor could find the original source. Keahapana (talk) 21:34, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

I added the two new sources you brought up. What do you think?--Cúchullain t/c 15:15, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
Yes, this improves the article. I added Piper as an external link. Although I still think it qualifies as a reliable source, I'll defer to your opinion. Best wishes, Keahapana (talk) 23:51, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

The Mexican Culture admires the Virgin Mary, marijuana is the revered plant of Mary. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.89.36.128 (talk • contribs)

Nahuatl Clarification

According to page 134 of Frances Karttunen's An Analytical Dictionary of Nahuatl, University of Oklahoma Press, 1992, the classical Nahuatl 'word' for prisoner is "mālli, [plural: māltin] or reduplicated to "mamālli [plural: mamāltin with the final consonant 'n' being weak]" not "mallihuan." Unless 'mallihuan' refers to another 'word', or a form not found in Karttunen's dictionary (another possibility is a source that I am not familiar with, such as a less-than-classical source or dialect), mallihuan seems to be based on mālli, as seen above, with possessed plural affix -huan (the prefix would then be 3rd person plural, which is nothing) added to the already present absolutive affix -li [-māl-li + -huan]; a seemingly nonsensical paradigm in classical Nahuatl. Can anybody clarify? — Preceding unsigned comment added by EcstaticStendhal (talk • contribs) 21:17, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

The word is not from Nahuatl. Cannabis was brought to the New World by the Spaniards. There is no Nahuatl word "mallihuan". The plural possessive suffix -huan is added after removing the absolutive suffix so "his prisoners" is imalhuan /i:malwa:n/, not *mallihuan. Also a possessive prefix is required also for the third person singular which has the prefix /i:-/·maunus · snunɐɯ· 03:03, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
if you are confident, will you remove that section in the page? --Potguru (talk) 03:55, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Before editing the page, I'd like to present an idea

Richard Evans Shultes, arguably the most knowledgeable subject matter expert on hallucinogenic plants, proposed that marijuana is a "Species of" cannabis.

MARIHUANA, HASHEESH, or HEMP (species of the genus Cannabis), also called Kif, Bhang, or Charas, is one of the oldest cultivated plants. It is also one of the most widely spread weeds, having escaped cultivation, appearing as an adventitious plant everywhere, except in the polar regions and the wet, forested tropics. Cannabis is the source of hemp fiber, an edible fruit, an industrial oil, a medicine, and a narcotic. Despite its great age and its economic importance, the plant is still poorly understood, characterized more by what we do not know about it than by what we know. Cannabis is a rank, weedy annual that is extremely variable and may attain a height of 18 feet. Flourishing best in disturbed, nitrogen-rich soils near human habitations, it has been called a "camp follower," going with man into new areas. It is normally dioecious--that is, the male and female parts are on different plants. The male or staminate plant is usually weaker than the female or pistillate plant. Pistillate flowers grow in the leaf axils. The intoxicating constituents are normally concentrated in a resin in the developing female flowers and adjacent leaves and stems.

113 citations in Google Scholar

--Potguru (talk) 18:31, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Is this a WP:SELFPUBLISHED source? If so I think we'll need to find another source. As much as I like Erowid, a lot of their content doesn't mesh well with our sourcing requirements. Thanks for discussing first. Sizeofint (talk) 18:41, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
No it's not, that's why I included the google reference. --Potguru (talk) 18:42, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
We are not citing a Golden Guide from 1976. Please learn about WP:RS, particularly the part about current sources. I think there's been an enormous amount of research on cannabis since 1976. I own this Golden Guide and it's not useful for Wikipedia. It's now 2016. Viriditas (talk) 18:43, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
You own it, fantastic. So you can verify. Why are you discrediting it? The source is one of the most respected scientists to ever study the class of plants. I mean we use the "glass pipe salesman" as a reference for the anslinger article. --Potguru (talk) 18:46, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
Alright, doesn't look self-published. It does seem a tad on the old side. Do you know of anything more recent? WP:OTHERSTUFF is not generally convincing unless it represents long-standing precedent. Sizeofint (talk) 18:50, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
Honestly, I think it is the beginning of the discussion. Dr. Shultes work forms the basis for most of what we know about hallucinogenic plants. As far as credibility the same publishing company authored a set of childrens encyclopedias about 15 years before this book was published. So I think they probably knew what they were doing. --Potguru (talk) 18:52, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
Golden Guides are not a RS for Wikipedia. Second of all, the source is outdated. Third, it isn't clear what you are trying to add. Viriditas (talk) 18:55, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
Publication date aside, is there a consensus on that or some evidence to believe the source is unreliable? --Potguru (talk) 18:57, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
I think I've already explained how to evaluate sources for reliability to you several times on other pages. And WP:SCIRS is even more strict. What exactly are you trying to add? Viriditas (talk) 19:01, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
I'm sorry but I have no secret plan. I realise you are trying to help but I beg of you, rather than point to an article please try to be specific. On what, specific, grounds are you saying the article should not be considered reliable? --Potguru (talk) 19:06, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
It depends on several factors, which is why I asked what you are trying to use it to say. You really need to answer that question to participate in a discussion about RS. The authoritativeness criterion is also in question as Schultes' work on cannabis has been challenged by McPartland and others. Cannabis research has also changed a great deal so the source fails the currency criterion. Finally, the publication is questionable. Golden field guides are tertiary sources, mostly designed for kids. I'm having trouble understanding why you are appealing to old sources when this problem has already been explained to you before. Viriditas (talk) 19:23, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

I don't see what a source like this could add to an article on the word "marijuana", considering the more up-to-date sources that are available.--Cúchullain t/c 19:25, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

What is being proposed here or asked? Is it the question if Richard Shultes is a reliable source? the answer is yes...BUT hes not published a book since the mid 90s (died in 2000 I think) would be best to use more modern sources. HOWEVER this article is about the word so sources about the topic directly are best even if 10 years old.....like
Basic:
Detailed:

--Moxy (talk) 19:37, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

McPartland & Guy as well as Small have all challenged work by Schultes on cannabis, most recently with DNA barcoding evidence. Viriditas (talk) 19:46, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
This is correct...but the origins of the "Word" meaning behind its usage is still cited. -- Moxy (talk) 19:52, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
Yes, the dispute I'm referring to is over the status of taxonomy, subspecies and varieties. Viriditas (talk) 19:58, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
Given I'm the one who started the section I kindly request Moxy NOT remove his valuable contributions. Let's get to the end of this. --Potguru (talk) 21:56, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Having looked at both sources cited above, while I will certainly agree they are more recent than the Shultes reference I'm not convinced that either is a very good description of the plant. It's not clear to me who wrote those sentences (in the sources) or how they verified their information. Just because the source is a dictionary does not mean they have done a very good job defining the subject. In fact, given how difficult it is for scientists to actually do any meaningful research on this plant and the long held belief that the plant was evil/harmful/etc I wonder if there are actually ANY reliable sources of information about marijuana in google scholar. Most of the highly cited articles, available in google, relate to the subject are CLEARLY biased against the plant. Is this crappy "Spanish Word Histories and Mysteries" really the BEST reference for this word? --Potguru (talk) 22:27, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

To keep uptodate I read the publications posted by the CENTER FOR MEDICINAL CANNABIS RESEARCH - University of California, San Diego - older publications (as in before 2011) can be found at the International Association for Cannabinoid Medicines case study page.-- Moxy (talk) 22:36, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

And if it is can we all agree that Schultes and the dictionary agree that Marijuana is not Cannabis but, as both sources say, is a "variety" or "species" (or 'type' for laymen) of cannabis? --Potguru (talk) 22:27, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

  • Source 1. "MARIHUANA, HASHEESH, or HEMP (species of the genus Cannabis), also called Kif, Bhang, or Charas, is one of the oldest cultivated plants".
  • Source 2. "In English, the term marijuana refers to the variety of the cannabis plant with the scientific name Cannabis Sativa variety Indica".

In a new dictionary definition we have "the dried leaves and flowers of the hemp plant that are smoked as a drug". Is marijuana hemp? No, it's not. There are definitions having the do with the amount of THC available. Hemp is DEFINED as a cannabis plant with less than 0.03% THC in most of the world. (When I say defined I'm talking about defined by governmental regulatory groups who license the hemp producers).

Doesn't that mean that Marijuana is a PORTION (of the plant) of ONE OR MORE VARIETIES of cannabis? --Potguru (talk) 22:51, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Are you reading the source posted before in other talks your in? why are you still asking this question and now here? -- Moxy (talk) 00:02, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

These articles are about cannabis (per their titles) and should not be used as references for this discussion about marijuana. This is an article about the word marijuana, not some other subject. As I think I demonstrated, Marijuana is a PORTION (of the plant) of ONE OR MORE VARIETIES of cannabis.. Do you agree? --Potguru (talk) 00:14, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

I dont think you have demonstrated that at all. The word marijuana is not a scientific term but a loose term from everyday language, it is both used about the effective part of the plant, and about the plant itself.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 00:25, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
Please clarify do you not accept what the references or am I missing the reference you are leaning on to make your conclusion? --Potguru (talk) 00:33, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
Your sources 1 and 2 contradict sources 3 and 4. Demonstrating that neither of the two definitions used is definitive.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 01:58, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
With all due respect, I do not see any conflict. They all read the same to me, that marijuana is a portion of a variety of cannabis plant. --Potguru (talk) 02:06, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
Your due respect is duly noted. The first two sources clearly consider marijuana to refer to the entire plant, whereas sources three and four consider it to refer only to the part that is used.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 02:44, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
I'd like to pick this up down below, if you don't mind? --Potguru (talk) 04:16, 24 January 2016 (UTC)


You have misread the source. The term "marijuana" has nothing to do with the parenthetical. Viriditas (talk) 01:24, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
You misread the title of the page. This is a page about marijuana. A word. Which I am trying to define. Do you have something to contribute? --Potguru (talk) 01:37, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Continuing conversation

I dont think you have demonstrated that at all. The word marijuana is not a scientific term but a loose term from everyday language, it is both used about the effective part of the plant, and about the plant itself.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 00:25, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Please clarify do you not accept what the references or am I missing the reference you are leaning on to make your conclusion? --Potguru (talk) 00:33, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
Your sources 1 and 2 contradict sources 3 and 4. Demonstrating that neither of the two definitions used is definitive.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 01:58, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
With all due respect, I do not see any conflict. They all read the same to me, that marijuana is a portion of a variety of cannabis plant. --Potguru (talk) 02:06, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
Your due respect is duly noted. The first two sources clearly consider marijuana to refer to the entire plant, whereas sources three and four consider it to refer only to the part that is used.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 02:44, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Source 1. states marihuana is a species of cannabis
  • Source 2. states marijuana is a variety of cannabis
  • Source 3. states marijuana is a portion of the hemp plant
  • Source 4. states marijuana is a portion of a cannabis plant - the hemp plant

So can we conclude anything or should I find better sources or how can I resolve this? I am attempting to find the best references possible about the subject matter. --Potguru (talk) 04:20, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

We can conclude that there are differing definitions.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 04:47, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
Thank you, I'll work on better sources. --Potguru (talk) 05:16, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
You will only get more differing definitions. Unless they are scientific or mathematical terms words do not have clear cut definitions.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 05:24, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
Looks like we'll need to consider context, then. Willondon (talk) 01:44, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
Any thoughts on how? --Potguru (talk) 03:07, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
Just give a definition that is broad and vague enough not to exclude any of the existing definitions. E.g. " is a name for the cannabis plant and a drug preparation made from it".·maunus · snunɐɯ· 03:31, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

more controversy

May 2016 Marijuana Vs Cannabis use of terminology dispute I just made an important edit to this page based upon quoted sources. Another editor came in and removed my correct statement replacing it with the prior sentiment which the editor felt was more appropriate [[4]]. I've noticed other editors acting in similar fashion because they do not seem to understand the nuanced differences between marijuana and cannabis. Per the original 1937 law banning marijuana from the US and ultimately all its trading partners, marijuana (or marihuana) is defined as " all parts of the plant Cannabis sativa L., whether growing or not; the seeds thereof; the resin extracted from any part of such plant; and every compound, manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture, or preparation of such plant, its seeds, or resins; but shall not include the mature stalks of such plant, fiber produced from such stalks, oil or cake made from the seeds of such plant, any other compound, manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture, or preparation of such mature stalks (except the resin extracted therefrom), fiber, oil, or cake, or the sterilized seed of such plant which is incapable of germination."[1] Clearly marijuana is only a portion of the cannabis plant, with the other portion being hemp. Many sources support this contention, that marijuana is only a portion of the cannabis plant. If there are no objections, after a while, I will revert the edits to their proper term "marijuana".

It seems there are a wide range of definitions as discussed in the section above. Why don't we just discuss the range of definitions in the article? Sizeofint (talk) 02:08, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Yup--Moxy (talk) 03:06, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Reminds me of Lewis Carroll's Humpty_Dumpty#In_Through_the_Looking-Glass:
"I don't know what you mean by 'glory,' " Alice said.
 Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. "Of course you don't—till I tell you. I meant 'there's a nice knock-down argument for you!' "
"But 'glory' doesn't mean 'a nice knock-down argument'," Alice objected. .
"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less."
And we all know what happened to Humpty Dumpty and that probable goes for others that use words to means just what they choose them to mean.--Aspro (talk) 17:14, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/hemp/taxact/mjtaxact.htm

Forgot edit summary

I accidentally hit save instead of preview, so didn't put an edit summary on my recent edit. I think I probably would have written something like, "clarifying wording and adding sources". —PermStrump(talk) 09:21, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

You can make a WP:DUMMYEDIT to add an edit summary. Just add or remove a space between a === and a section title. Sizeofint (talk) 15:20, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
i have restored the article to the duel meaning and removed the wrong usage for the USA. -- Moxy (talk) 15:52, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Marijuanaelier

A steward of marijuana. One who professionally specializes in assessing cannabinoids. Marijuanaeliers are typically experts in the science of pairing cannabis strains. Scott W. Martin (talk) 06:29, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Marijuana (word). 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:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:50, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

No Mention of Hearst nor Anslinger

Is no mention of Randolf William Hearst (& newspapers) nor his nephew Harry J Anslinger (& drug war), and their prominent roles in popularising the word, intentional, because of some reason (e.g. maybe some controversy over Jack Herer's research and depictions?  ???), or ... just no one got around to adding that yet? ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_J._Anslinger#The_campaign_against_marijuana_(cannabis)_1930%E2%80%931937 barely even subtextually references it:"(Cannabis indica, often called "Indian Hemp" in documents before the 1940s)") Such information seems pertinent to the Marijuana (word) page, so much so, it merits the page's existence outside a general Cannabis page. Djt789 (talk) 17:05, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

Benefits Of Marijuana.

Is Marijuana Good For You? NigJal22 (talk) 16:37, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

The high-quality reliable sources say different things but not a question for this article, see Effects of cannabis. ♫ RichardWeiss talk contribs 17:00, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

Spanish use

I think a new section should be added for Spanish use of the term marijuana. Sources elsewhere in the article refer to the word originating in Mexico or among Spanish-speaking people in the Southwestern United States. While I was reviewing the English pop-culture use of the word for the discussion, above, I found out that all of the songs on the Mexican extreme metal band Brujeria's EP titled Marijuana, that was released with a complimentary book of matches, are written and sung in Spanish. So I think there is enough for a Spanish use section including subsections about "Early use of the term" and "Contemporary pop culture use" of the term in Spanish. -- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 04:09, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

Have no clue what a band has to do with this.....but yes academic overview could be expanded The Mysterious Origins of the Word 'Marijuana', Alan Piper, Sino-Platonic Papers 153, 2005....--Moxy 🍁 04:25, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Marijuana_(word)/Archive_1&oldid=972267325"