436:(Thisnamestaken) is a bad thing because this is how many/all articles here start out and the article is well written. I am saying that the entire article, from start to finish reads like original research, interspersed with a "How to" guide (e.g. "If someone rolls or passes you a duff joint (eg, too tight, too loose, to wet, keeps going out) it is best to quietly mention the deplorability of the joint to the roller...") I appreciate that "Spliff politics" may exist, that it may vary by city/region/country, with spliffs being passed anti-clockwise in the Southern and clockwise in the Northern hemispheres, respectively, much like the
137:, or possibly just from lack of reliable mainstream sources, but I am wondering if it possible to get a reliable, mainstream source that covers marijuana culture? Isn't this kind of a fringe topic to begin with? More than anything, I am struck by what an exceptionally well-done article this is in other ways. Good graphics, good writing, good maintenance (apparently mostly by
316:
Marihuana Users and Drug
Subcultures BD Johnson - 1973 - Wiley; The Marijuana Smokers E Goode - 1970 - Basic Books; The Disreputable Pleasures-- J Hagan - 1977 - McGraw-Hill ; Ryerson; The Black Candle EF Murphy - 1973 - Coles Pub. Co., & there are a number of articles citing them listed in GS. I have a pdf copy of the Zimmerman article.
190:
for those "etiquette" websites. In the end this isn't about facts and figures but about personal attitudes, which vary too widely among tens of millions of users for any generalizations like those in the article to have any broad validity. I'm afraid it's just not encyclopedic material. In the end
352:
disappeared in a puff with a speedy delete months ago, but was no where near as detailed as this. It is well written, I googled some of the most eloquent sentences and none of it seems plagerised. Sourcing is a requirement on
Knowledge (XXG), but to enter an Afd, move to delete and walk away strikes
435:
from nominator. My argument is not that this article is not written in proper
English, nor that the pictures are inappropriate, nor that the article has been subject to vandalism, because I appreciate these are not reasons for deleting an article. I am also not saying that having one main editor
315:
methodology in the counter-cultural papers of the period. I do not think they are indexed; I do not think they are online--there might be problems tracking down the copyright holders. There are also books listed as "related" on Google
Scholar; most are general, but the relevant ones seem to be:
48:
The main argument for deletion is lack of sources. Several have been suggested during the AfD, but no one has stated that those sources support the current content of the artilce, and no one has actually added them to the article. Let's hope this will be improved in the near future.
298:
1972; from Web of
Science , JSTOR, and Google Scholar , the only academic papers to cite it are Maynard DW, Social-order and Plea Barganing in the Courtroom" in "Sociological Quarterly" 24 (2): 233-251 1983, and "The Social Organization of Deviants" Joel Best; David F. Luckenbill
543:. No-one's added any sources; we've just been faffing around with monkey business on the AfD instead. I think instead of outright deletion, we could possibly stubify this and add the sources as "further reading" - the closer of this AfD may wish to consider this as an option.-
203:. I have heard the term referred to as 'the politics of' smoking cannabis - it should probably exist under a title with the word 'politics' in it, if it can be sourced, as we refer to articles by their most common name generally speaking, but I doubt it can be sourced.-
186:. Deltopia is correct that the majority of mainstream media won't give feature coverage to most marijuana-related topics, making this hard to cite well enough for an encyclopedia article. This appears to be based utterly on someone's
278:
as another article to take account of the source found by UncleG, (who has as usual my admiration for such things) and probably other work. I think a better title might be
Marijuana etiquette, with a redirect. The
440:
effect. However, I listed this article for deletion because I could not see anything worth saving perhaps other than the word "Spliff politics". I know that the article has seen a lot of work, but
357:. If we have time to read Afd, we surely have time to constructively edit the articles we comment on. I will try and source some of its contents over the weekend and hope other editors will to.
340:, shortly after it was written. I have smoked this product (but obviously never inhaled) and with changing attitudes and legislation (Netherlands and UK), it may well be necessary to discuss
406:- As I said earlier, I always felt this was a notable concept going on what I've heard about it IRL. If anyone wants to significantly rework it to meet Knowledge (XXG)'s standards, then
387:
500:
Golub discusses the "circular nature" of both the bong and cigarette rituals, "blunt chasing", and the idea of taking a few puffs and then passing along as means of intake control (
113:
153:. I don't smoke pot myself and I have heard of this concept, the 'politics' of smoking cannabis, from a friend of mine who does. This may actually be notable, but it's
444:
is not good enough. Lastly, thanks to Uncle G for scrounging out the Social
Problems article, which I too have downloaded and will have a look at after the weekend.
551:
422:
211:
169:
525:
with the proviso that the article is cleaned up and properly sourced. (And I'm sure sources abound; others have listed some, and I suspect
86:
81:
90:
17:
73:
489:
Natarajan+Hough cite some research into adolescent marijuana use and touch upon the common form of "passing around the spliff" (
304:
254:
157:
that's the problem here. If we could try
Googling for sources that may be helpful but probably not due to likely lack of
571:
36:
191:
it's not "politics" anyhow, just "ethics" of group behavior, so if WP:ATT sources existed this would need retitling.
570:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
348:
and it doesn't appear to have any political motives. Neither does it appear to have been vandalised. The first
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
251:
Here's a source that deals with this subject, even though it doesn't support most of this article's contents:
556:
535:
517:
448:
427:
397:
377:
361:
322:
312:
270:
246:
216:
195:
174:
145:
124:
55:
77:
545:
416:
205:
163:
349:
69:
61:
241:
138:
441:
53:
478:
Abernethy discusses the psychological reasons for marijuana smokers to form rings when smoking (
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
337:
445:
280:
235:
231:
121:
134:
532:
504:
The
Cultural/Subcultural Contexts of Marijuana Use at the Turn of the Twenty-First Century
227:
333:
187:
183:
158:
226:. Interesting (and as noted above, well written), but not worth more than a comment in
255:"You Can't Help But Get Stoned: Notes on the Social Organization of Marijuana Smoking"
154:
370:
142:
50:
369:
and clean up. There is both academic study and cultural references for this (watch
514:
267:
107:
394:
374:
358:
294:
article is from 1977, and the only earlier reference it cites is Sherri Cavan,
527:
192:
437:
318:
531:
and the like have published material on marijuana smoking etiquette.) —
467:
There's some discussion of group smoking etiquette in
Clinard+Quinney (
120:
Entire article reads like original research, delete as per WP:NOT#OR.
456:
There's a list of prescriptive rules of "ganja etiquette" in Arooka (
332:
but with the understanding that the article needs to be sourced.
564:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
311:
My memory is that such things were widely written about with
506:. Haworth Press. pp. 29, 57, 71–72, 94–95. ISBN 078903204X.
303:
Vol. 28, No. 1. (Oct., 1980), pp. 14-31. JSTOR Stable URL:
253:
Don H. Zimmerman and D. Lawrence Wieder (December 1977).
238:
or some other of those x-amount of articles about ganja.
493:
Illegal Drug Markets: From Research to Prevention Policy
103:
99:
95:
141:). However this AfD debate turns out, good job. :)
495:. Criminal Justice Press. pp. 64–65. ISBN 1881798259.
473:. Holt, Rinehart & Winston, Incorporated. p. 104.
469:
Marshall Barron Clinard and Richard Quinney (1973).
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
462:. Free World Press. pp. 140–141. ISBN 0973892803.
574:). No further edits should be made to this page.
8:
491:Mangai Natarajan and Michael Hough (2000).
482:What's Going On? (in Modern Texas Folklore)
460:James Bong's Ultimate SpyGuide to Marijuana
182:. Well-written but not sourced from any
388:list of Social science-related deletions
386:: This debate has been included in the
336:is a concern here and I raised it as a
306:--neither seem relevant to this facet.
471:Criminal Behavior Systems: A Typology
344:. A single writer itsn't a bad thing
283:article is only about the technology.
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
24:
480:Francis Edward Abernethy (1976).
353:me as sloppy editing, if not Afd
1:
484:. Encino Press. pp. 104–105.
265:(2): 198–207. ERIC EJ172836.
591:
502:Andrew Lang Golub (2006).
536:21:25, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
518:12:30, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
513:Please read and discuss.
449:09:37, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
428:08:40, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
398:07:50, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
378:07:48, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
362:01:45, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
323:22:43, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
271:19:50, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
247:17:39, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
217:19:12, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
196:17:31, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
175:17:00, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
146:13:44, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
125:13:12, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
567:Please do not modify it.
557:17:55, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
56:23:41, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
32:Please do not modify it.
313:Participant observation
296:Hippies of the Haight
139:User:Thisnamestaken
180:Puff, puff, delete
400:
391:
334:Original research
188:original research
582:
569:
507:
496:
485:
474:
463:
392:
382:
301:Social Problems,
281:Cannabis smoking
266:
245:
244:
236:Joint (cannabis)
232:Cannabis smoking
184:reliable sources
111:
93:
34:
590:
589:
585:
584:
583:
581:
580:
579:
578:
572:deletion review
565:
555:
552:r e s e a r c h
501:
490:
479:
468:
457:
426:
423:r e s e a r c h
395:John Vandenberg
375:John Vandenberg
350:Spliff politics
292:Social Problems
259:Social Problems
252:
240:
239:
228:Cannabis (drug)
215:
212:r e s e a r c h
173:
170:r e s e a r c h
84:
70:Spliff politics
68:
65:
62:Spliff politics
44:The result was
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
588:
586:
577:
576:
560:
559:
549:
538:
520:
511:
510:
509:
498:
487:
476:
465:
453:More sources:
451:
430:
420:
401:
380:
364:
326:
325:
309:
308:
307:
285:
284:
273:
249:
221:
220:
219:
209:
177:
167:
148:
118:
117:
64:
59:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
587:
575:
573:
568:
562:
561:
558:
554:
553:
548:
547:
542:
539:
537:
534:
530:
529:
524:
521:
519:
516:
512:
505:
499:
494:
488:
483:
477:
472:
466:
461:
455:
454:
452:
450:
447:
443:
439:
434:
431:
429:
425:
424:
419:
418:
413:
409:
405:
402:
399:
396:
389:
385:
381:
379:
376:
372:
371:Human Traffic
368:
365:
363:
360:
356:
351:
347:
343:
342:"ganjaquette"
339:
335:
331:
328:
327:
324:
321:
320:
314:
310:
305:
302:
297:
293:
289:
288:
287:
286:
282:
277:
274:
272:
269:
264:
260:
256:
250:
248:
243:
237:
233:
229:
225:
222:
218:
214:
213:
208:
207:
202:
199:
198:
197:
194:
189:
185:
181:
178:
176:
172:
171:
166:
165:
160:
156:
152:
149:
147:
144:
140:
136:
132:
129:
128:
127:
126:
123:
115:
109:
105:
101:
97:
92:
88:
83:
79:
75:
71:
67:
66:
63:
60:
58:
57:
54:
52:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
566:
563:
550:
544:
540:
526:
522:
503:
492:
481:
470:
459:
432:
421:
415:
411:
410:, otherwise
407:
403:
383:
366:
354:
345:
341:
329:
317:
300:
295:
291:
275:
262:
258:
223:
210:
204:
200:
179:
168:
162:
150:
130:
119:
46:No Consensus
45:
43:
31:
28:
446:Mmoneypenny
122:Mmoneypenny
533:Psychonaut
528:High Times
442:WP:EFFORT
458:Arooka.
438:Coriolis
355:trolling
242:number29
143:Deltopia
114:View log
541:Comment
515:Uncle G
433:Comment
404:Comment
346:per say
338:WP:PROD
276:Rewrite
268:Uncle G
201:Comment
151:Comment
87:protect
82:history
412:delete
359:Mike33
224:Delete
135:WP:NOR
131:Delete
91:delete
546:h i s
417:h i s
206:h i s
193:Barno
164:h i s
159:WP:RS
108:views
100:watch
96:links
16:<
523:Keep
408:keep
384:Note
367:Keep
330:Keep
290:The
155:WP:V
133:per
104:logs
78:talk
74:edit
393:--
390:.
373:).
319:DGG
112:– (
51:DES
508:).
497:).
486:).
475:).
464:).
414:.-
263:25
261:.
257:.
234:,
230:,
161:.-
106:|
102:|
98:|
94:|
89:|
85:|
80:|
76:|
116:)
110:)
72:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.