Wikipedia: Cannabis

[Guest]

Has anyone checked out the page on Wikipedia for Cannabis strains?

Wouldn't it be a great idea to build some sort of strain Wiki, each strain having its own page as well? It would be awesome! If I had the resources and knowhow I would probably start it... but I don't. Maybe ICMag should go for a Wiki style strainguide?

 

[Guest]

I am very familiar with wikipedia's Cannabis section, very easy to navigate

I am very familiar with wikipedia's Cannabis section, very easy to navigate

an exerpt from wiki,
Undetermined

* Bubblegum
* Buddha
* California Orange Bud
* Early Girl
* Great White Shark
* Himalayan Gold
* Lemon Diesel
* PK2
* KC 33
* Mighty Mite
* Northern Berry
* [(DooDoo Funk)²]²

Lemme get a hit offa that Doo Doo Funk Twice Squared!!! lol this is hilarious by the way, this whole "strainguide" they have here. IMHO lol
soem more of my pennies for ya...
the prospect of bringing a strainguide like this to IC is ok, but boring, + do a search there is at least one HUGE thread on strain lineage here, many have put time and effort into it, worth checking out friend.
What would be REALLY nice, would be a smoke report section similiar to the one found at DHK, very simple, clean, and organized alphabettically with pictures and reports (and ratings) for each commercially available seedstrain. Not a forum layout, a designed section of the site, it'd be a hit, i, for one, would likely never leave here,
think, BIG WALMART lol

peace
be well

cj

 

[guineapig]

what should i do with this wikipedia?......is the whole concept behind it a sort of communal encyclopedia? I can do some good writing on the historical and scientific side of things but i am afraid i would make a mistake when it comes to the strain classifications.....i bet there is a strain maven out there who could bust out the strain section with one brain tied behind his back.....wiki wiki wiki wiki.........-gp out

 

[GreatLakes THC]

... It is scant and brief ...

Probably why more haven't posted strains there. I'd love to see a feature like this over here though. The knowledge at this site is among the best, but with the leadership we have here I think we could create the de facto strain guide.

GreatLakes THC

 

[I.M. Boggled]

Great Idea...

Great Idea...

The Wikipedia list is rather piteefulll at this point.

Adopting this Strain guide project as an in house project would be very beneficial to the worldwide cannabis community as a whole, methinks.

We could probably put specific suggestions such as recommendable for its medical qualities/ virtues (if known).
If a strain is generally known for its brain meltdown, this is some serious cartoon shit type of smoke, we can probably mention that as a "Good Thing" for recreational purposes.

Inspired Idea... I like it...


The only active listing so far is this lonely one:

Northern Lights (strain)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Northern Lights is one of the most famous strains of Cannabis indica ever to have been bred. First developed in the 1970's in the Seattle, Washington area, and of uncertain origin beyond that, it has spawned a number of substrains. For many years these substrains and cross-strains dominated marijuana festivals such as the Cannabis Cup. Most are considered to be among the easiest strains to grow, being quite hardy and forgiving to the novice indoor grower. Northern Lights #5 in particular is reknown for this trait. The strain's reputation as a compact, high-yield plant also makes it popular among marijuana traffickers.

This plant article is a stub.
Please help Wikipedia grow by expanding it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Lights_(strain)

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia written collaboratively by many of its readers. Lots of people are constantly improving Wikipedia, making thousands of changes an hour, all of which are recorded on the page history and the Recent Changes page. Nonsense and vandalism are usually removed quickly, and their creators banned.

How can I help?

Don't be afraid to edit pages on Wikipedia—anyone can edit, and we encourage users to be bold...but don't be reckless! Find something that can be improved, either in content, grammar or formatting, then fix it. Worried about breaking Wikipedia? Don't be: it can always be fixed or improved later. So go ahead, edit an article and help make Wikipedia the best source of information on the Internet! Please note that Wikipedia has no specific spelling: American English and Commonwealth English are both used.

Editing is very easy:

1. Click edit this page at the top of the page....
2. Type a message.
3. Click save page at the bottom of the page to save your writing
... or "show preview" to test your changes.

Wikipedia:FAQ
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:FAQ

 

[I.M. Boggled]

Future Wikipedian's, lend me your ear...

Future Wikipedian's, lend me your ear...

Wikipedia:Who writes Wikipedia

Unlike other encyclopedias, the volunteer writers of articles in Wikipedia do not need to be experts or scholars. Volunteers do not need to go through any formal process before creating an article or editing an existing article. Many people have created or edited articles in the Wikipedia. They come from countries around the world and are of all ages and backgrounds.

Anyone who contributes to this encyclopedia is called a Wikipedian.


* 1 Improving and assessing article quality
* 2 How Wikipedians fix mistakes
* 3 How Wikipedians improve articles
...

Improving and assessing article quality

It is Wikipedia policy to add to the encyclopedia only statements that are verifiable, and the Wikipedia style guide encourages editors to cite sources. Sometimes Wikipedians do not follow these policies, because they forget or because they are not aware of the policy. Then readers of the article cannot be sure that a statement is verifiable.

Many users of Wikipedia consult the page history of an article in order to assess how many people have contributed to the article. An article can be considered more likely to be accurate when it has been edited by many different people (since most edits make constructive changes, rather than destructive ones).

If an article is being edited by people who hold different points of view, someone may place a notice at the top of the article indicating that it is the subject of a dispute about neutral point of view. To resolve the dispute, the interested editors will share their points of view on the article's talk page. They will attempt to reach consensus about how to edit so that both their perspectives are fairly represented. This allows wikipedia to not only be a place of information, but also of collaboration.

One list of articles that have been edited by many people is the list of featured articles. These articles are considered to be of high quality when they are granted featured article status, and if later edits reduce the quality of the page, a user can nominate an article for removal from that special status.

The best way to verify the accuracy of a particular statement is to find independent sources to affirm that statement, such as books, magazine articles, television news reports, trade journals, or web sites. For more guidance on evaluating the accuracy of Wikipedia articles, see Wikipedia:Researching with Wikipedia.
[edit]

How Wikipedians fix mistakes

The volunteer editors of the Wikipedia spend time checking that each new article and each change made to an existing article is improving the article's quality. When an editor finds something that has been added to Wikipedia that should not have been, he or she will revert the article to the last version which he or she considers accurate. Different volunteers choose to focus on different fixes, such as countering systemic bias; fact and reference checking; fixing punctuation; and improving grammar.

Sometimes an article is vandalized, especially if it is about a high-profile subject or hot topic of popular debate. In this case, experienced Wikipedians are quick to revert the page to its previous correct version.

How Wikipedians improve articles

When a reader finds something in an article which he or she doesn't think should be there, that person can edit the article and help make Wikipedia more accurate and useful. Someone may place a notice at the top of the article indicating that it needs to be cleaned up. It is also possible to create a new article to share information that is not already in the Wikipedia.

Wikipedia:Verifiability...that would be "you people", i.e. "us experts" at Icmag forums
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verifiable

SMILE everybody, it's good your soul.
peace.

 

[Guest]

bump

check this out--

www.wikipedia.org/wiki/cannabinoids

nice sunday read. not a bad warm-up for ye ole noggin

shake it ez

 

[Guest]

SMILE everybody, it's good for your soul.
peace.

:smile:

 

[Guest]

I think it a great idea to start listing individual strain on there.

It would eventually become a great reference for not only us (hobby growers/breeders) but for the rest of the world that is "SO CLUELESS" about ganja.

I have lots of strain knowledge....not nearly what some of you guys have though.

I'll go peek over there today, and maybe start something

IcMag and former OG/CW peeps would def. be the ones running the show.

Is it safe to post pics over there ...thats something we should think about "Safety"