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

GA Review[edit]

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.[reply]

GA review (see here for criteria)

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

C. No original research:
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
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
No edit wars.
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):
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)[reply]

June 13 reading[edit]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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