Talk:Legal history of cannabis in the United States/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Racepacket (talk) 17:50, 8 June 2011 (UTC) Thank you for nominating this article. I enjoyed it. Please fix disamb. links for Jamestown and Newark. Fn 17 is a dead link.

GA review (see here for criteria)

---

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   "relates to the lawfulness of marijuana use"->"relates to the regulation of marijuana use" - less POV and more accurate

   "Prohibitions of Cannabis"->"Prohibitions on the use of Cannabis"

   "reschedule cannabis have failed and the United"->"reschedule cannabis under the Act have failed, and the United"

   "state by laws instituted through the"->"state by laws adopting the" - "uniform laws" are model laws that a state can adopt or a state can adopt a law on the same subject that is different from a uniform act. It is a decision made by every state legislature.

   "ban trade with fibers"->"ban trade in fibers"

   Please reword "As a result of the Uniform State Narcotic Act the Federal Bureau of Narcotics encouraged state governments to adopt it." - two separate ideas. First, that a expert panel drafted a model Uniform State Narcotic Act and second that the Fed government recommended that states adopt the uniform act. Avoid implication of cause and effect.

   "push to outlaw all drugs."->"push to outlaw all recreational drugs." ???

   quote template broken?

   "was based on hearings[24] reports.[25]"->"was based on hearings[24] and reports.[25]"

   "1989 and are fast growing in number."->"1989 and have spread since." - subjective as to rate of growth. Do you count courts or population affected by those courts as a measure?

   "in lieu of serving a jail sentence."->"a conventional criminal court with the possibility of serving a jail sentence." - parallel

• Done. CrowzRSA 23:31, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

1. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   Need more accessdates

   I had to fix a few refs, but I think they're good now (accessdates aren't required if there is a date available per Wikipedia:CITEHOW). CrowzRSA 23:31, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

2. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   What role has NORML played in lobbying for legal reform?

   Benefit of a drug court is the rehabilitated offender does not have a criminal record.

   Any statistics as to the number of criminal marijuana prosecutions per year or the cost of incarcerations?

   There is a statistic on arrests from 1965 to 2009

3. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

4. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

   No edit wars.

5. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

6. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   I am placing the article on hold so that you may address the above noted concerns. Racepacket (talk) 21:34, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

June 13 reading

Thank you for your recent changes in response to the review. The article no longer has disamb. or invalid external links. We still have a few concerns, which were raised above.

• Please summarize Decriminalization of non-medical cannabis in the United States#Advocacy in a paragraph for this article.
• "Offenders will have to plead guilty to the charge"->"To enter this program, offenders are required to plead guilty to the charge"
• Consider adding to the Drug Court section that some Drug Court programs leave the offender with an expunged criminal record. Racepacket (talk) 17:57, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
• I am still unclear about this sentence in the lead paragraph, "were regulated as a drug in every state by laws adopting the Uniform State Narcotic Drug Act.[1]" The source says, "By 1937 every state had enacted some form of legislation relating to marijuana, and thirty-five had enacted the Uniform Act.43" - so although every state outlawed marijuana, only 35 out of 48 laws adopted the Uniform State Narcotic Drug Act. How about rephrasing it: "were regulated as a drug in every state, including in 35 states that adopted the Uniform State Narcotic Drug Act.[1]"

The above concerns are still present in the article. Thank you for your hard work. Racepacket (talk) 06:27, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

I don't want to add the bit about the expungement as the nominator is more familiar with the subject than I, perhaps he can consider it on his return.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:09, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you Wehwalt for stepping in, and congratulations to all on another Good Article. Racepacket (talk) 17:55, 16 June 2011 (UTC)