Talk:420 (cannabis culture)/Archive 2

message: Why do we have a section for information which is known to be wrong? I don't see the relevence. I would like to remove this whole section, anything in it worth keeping should be moved to the section that asserts fact and provide a citation. This article has alot of original research and this is just one section I am going to fix up. Please let me know your opinions so I can take them into account. HighInBC 19:38, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If we didn't then people who thought the obviously wrong stuff was correct would add it as correct.  We need a list of commonly held misconceptions. Mathiastck 13:14, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: People do add obviously wrong stuff and it is removed regularly. The threshold is verifiablity not truth. As for an list of commonly held misconceptions, that sounds like an interesting article. HighInBC 13:20, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Mixing the reefer and wikipedia doesn't work that well :)  I thought the 420 thing came from the waldos, as the article says. Dave420 16:34, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Refuted urban legends 

message: I wouldn't ever know how to actually go about proving which ones are intentional and which ones aren't. My guess is if it is featured specifically. Like an address or time, it is perhaps intention. Especially on face-clocks as the time 4:20 has both hands in the same spot which wouldn't be as cinematically interesting. The Simpsons seem to reference 420 a lot. Also a director or producer probably won't validate the joke of a lowly prop assistant or set crew. There were a few I wasn't sure about, like the wrestling one, but since I don't know a thing about wrestling I'm just going to leave it. Similarly, if you don't know anything about pot smoking or haven't seen the film you should probably leave it alone or demand citation. There's also the issue of drugs playing into these marked coincidences, so it's also argueable 4:20 is just one of 7200 other possible times and stoners just have a tendancy to single this one out. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Unsigned
:Unless the reference has something directly to do with cannabis, or a citation can show a common beleif that it relates to cannabis, then it is not relevent to this article. You should not have to know anything about cannabis culture or need to have watched the movie because the threshold for inclusion on wikipedia is verifibility.
:My own, or your own, experiences with these movie and/or drug culture is only relevent to the level that we can find external sources to back it up, otherwise it would be WP:OR. Many of the items you have placed there do not meet WP:Verifiability, which is not an optional policy. I am going to remove the ones that do not demostrate a clear relationship to cannabis. HighInBC 00:10, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: For one thing, pulp fiction has some clocks that say 420, and others that don't. Also, just having 420 is not enough as the name of the article is 420 (cannabis culture), it must be directly related to cannabis aswell. As for the futurama reference it was already in the article. HighInBC 13:20, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: <<it must be directly related to cannabis as well>> Err, that's what 420 means here as indicated by the "(cannabis culture)" after the number, so that the term will disambiguate from other terms representing the actual number 420. If someone wants information directly related to Cannabis maybe they should consult... on the count of one, two, three....The Cannabis article!! Drdr1989 00:55, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I think this is hard enogh to prove that it warrants posting without any proof. If anyone can explain to how this proof should be provided I will change my opintion on this subject. Ferrelas 22:16, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Well, if somebody can find a citation where the writer or director or even the set dresser stated that this was done as a cannabis reference. The fact is the the number 420 comes up all over. And if there was no way to verify it, then it cannot be included in any article. See WP:VERIFIABILITY for more information on this. HighInBC 22:20, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: LOL, here we go again... just check out the DVD's subtitles. The reference is actually made before the scene itself. If you're high, you'll miss it. Drdr1989 00:05, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Yes, I do. Don't take it personally. Drdr1989 23:43, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Subtitles? Do you mean the dialog of the movie? Or mabye directors commentary? What type of reference? Has anyone else noticed this and published it already? HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 00:50, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

text: While what you say may be true, a published source is required to connect clocks saying 4:20 to cannabis. I see Jonathunder has given you a welcome on your talk page, in that welcome you will find links to how wikipedia works. Specifically the policies WP:Verifiability and WP:No original research apply in this situation. Perhaps you can show a link to an interview where Tarintino mentions that it is a drug reference? Thank you for discussing this on the talk page. HighInBC 22:31, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps you can show yourself to a video store and buy the DVD.  It states so there. Drdr1989 00:57, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

text: States so where? at the video store? on the cover? the directors comentary? An interview? Can you supply a link? HighInBC 02:31, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In the director's subtitles while watching the DVD. Drdr1989 00:00, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

text: If it mentions it is a cannabis reference in the movie's directors subtitles then you can add it giving that as a reference. It is essential that you give the reference so that other editors can confirm it. I would add it myself but I don't have access to that particualr reference right now. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 15:01, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Understood. Will try to get the exact reference copy soon (rather than just say "Pulp Fiction DVD")...unless someone else is reading this and adds it beforehand. Drdr1989 23:47, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: 420 in film and television

message: "...and while the protest has gone forward on a much smaller scale, police now arrest any smokers and the tone has changed markedly from that of a peaceful, albeit defiant, protest to one of conflict and division between students, police, and administrators"
I have put the above line back into the article.  It was removed by User:JDoorjam because he believed it to be POV, but I am forced to disagree with him. Any observer who witnessed a pre-2002 protest and a post-2002 protest would clearly note radical changes in the way the protest was conducted and the attitudes and behaviors of those involved.  Previously, the celebration was a community event, where all elements (protesters, police, administrators) were coexisting peacefully.  The protest was very low-key, there was never any violence, and it was relatively quiet (or as quiet as a field with thousands of people can be), and lasted nearly all day.  Now, the police form riot lines, march though the protesters with clubs and pepper spray and readied firearms, there is a lot of shouting, people getting pushed to the ground, smokers getting wrestled, handcuffed, and dragged away, and the protest lasts only an hour or so.  Basically, it's like a completely different event, and clear physical boundary lines are established between groups-- you are either a cop, with the cop group, an administrator nodding approvingly from the sidelines, or a student in the middle of the hysteria.  Instead of a peaceful protest, now it's a fight.  This is a very real change and it has nothing to do with your point of view.  LearningKnight 18:37, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The threshold of inclusion on wikipedia is not truth, but verifiability. Do you have any reliable citations that verifies this statement? If not then it should not be included. HighInBC 19:37, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  University of Vermont 

message: A have tagged 4 sections as not having any citations. These sections make bold claims such as many people visit the field at or around 4:20 PM just to witness the "fog" of marijuana smoke that hovers over the crowd. and The largest known celebration of this kind.
WHo made HighInBC the fu**ing king of cannabis? its chills, its for everyone, not for anal pr*cks.74.99.29.165 00:59, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too much uncited material 

message: This entire section is uncited, please return them to the article once citations are found: HighInBC 23:30, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, not really relevent to the article though. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 03:24, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  entire radio section uncited 

message: Note: All times are P.M. unless otherwise specified.
* Many FM and some AM radio stations in the United States play a Bob Marley track daily at 4:20 p.m., a tradition usually known as Mandatory Marley.
* KZRR 94 Rock in Albuquerque, New Mexico, plays a Pink Floyd song every day at 4:20, which they refer to as the "4:20 Floyd Fix".
* 94.1 KPFA in Berkeley, California, airs "The 420 Report", hosted by Ed Rosenthal, typically on the last Friday of each month at noon. The hour includes cannabis-related news, as well as call-in advice for growers, patients, and people with legal troubles.
*96.1 The Beat In Colorado Springs Colorado every day has the 4:20 bong hit of the day were they release an unreleased song
*97.7 Hitz FM in St. Catharines, Ontario, Canada airs a cannabis-related song at 4:20 daily, known as the "420 Funny".
*99.7 the fox, a classic rock radio station in Charlotte, North Carolina has the 420 smoke break every day at 4:20 pm where they play songs by artists who are known marijuana users.
* 100.7 WZXL in New Jersey does a segment called "getting stoned on the ride home" at 4:20 on weekdays, during which a set of Rolling Stones tracks is played. 
* DC 101 in Manassas, Virginia plays "Smoke 2 Joints" and asks callers to do bong hits on the air.
* 102.1 The Edge in Toronto, Canada has interesting discussions during 'The 420 Thought', on topics such as "Where is the best place to 420?"
* KMAD 102.5 in Sherman, Texas, plays the track "Mary Jane's Last Dance" by Tom Petty & The Heartbreakers at 4:20 on weekdays.
* 104.1 WMRQ in Hartford, CT, would host the "4:20 Brownie" every weekday, during which a cannabis related tune or popular stoner anthem was played, until they changed formats in September of 2003.
* A radio station in Roanoke, Virginia (96.3 FM) has a 4:20 Smoke Break  every weekday at 4:20pm. Their slogan is "Smoke'em if you got'em)
* Classic Rock 104.5 KPUS in Corpus Christi, Texas, listeners have the ability to "roll their own everyday at 4:20." At this time each day, one listener gets to pick three songs to play at 4:20. Bong bubbles are heard in the background between songs.
* 104.9 The Monkey in Seattle, Washington, radio station encourages listeners to call in and do bong rips over the phone at 4:20.
* 105.9 The Rock in Nashville, Tennessee, airs a segment every weekday at 4:20 called the "4:20 Smokebreak." Host Joe Elvis tells listeners, "Smoke 'em if you got 'em." The segment often plays songs related to marijuana.
* KROCK in Edmonton, Canada, does a "Roll Your Own" request segment every day at 4:20.
* The XM Radio station "The Boneyard" reminds everyone that it is 'bong time' at 4:20.
* The radio show 4:20 Drug War News, a short talk segment which promotes legalization of certain drugs, is usually aired at 4:20.
* The Tom Leykis Show has several callers take bong hits simultaneously on the air at 4:20 on April 20.
* In San Francisco, California everyday on 104.5 "KFOG", "Smoke Two Joints" by Sublime is played at 4:20.
----
The word "PEACE" is found in the King James Version of the Bible 420 times total. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.143.118.13 (talk • contribs) 19:20, November 14, 2006 (UTC)
:Thanks, not really relevent to the article though. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 03:24, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Occurrences on the radio

message: Hi - it's hard to find someone who says "420 friendly, that means you can smoke up", but do you think that there is ambiguity about what this (for example) room ad means? http://boston.backpage.com/rentals/classifieds/ViewAd?oid=oid%3A407813&name=roommates Trollderella 18:01, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The problem with this article is that 420 is used often as a code. Many event are most likely references to pot, even obviously to someone in the scene, however we need to verify it. This article was full of unverified material before and my and a few editors have trimmed it down to verifiable stuff. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 18:06, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

text: I know this is not an acceptable source, but it helps... http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=190143 Trollderella 18:09, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

text: I think it's unlikely that we will find one, but here is another blog with the same explanation. http://thetreehouseandthecave.blogspot.com/2005/06/420-friendly.html
I agree, that is why alot of slang usage of the term is not in the article because by it is difficult to verify. Unfortunatly many unreliable source do no add up to one reliable source. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 18:19, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

text: But the usage IS verified, the fact that this usage occurs in room ads is all that is being claimed here. Trollderella 18:43, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK - here we go, how about this, from New West http://www.newwest.net/index.php/topic/article/boulder_still_a_bastion_of_hippies_and_radicals_apparently/C82/L40/ Trollderella 19:23, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

text: ""But while cigarettes are a deal breaker for some, a number of Craigslist users across the country (Denver and Boulder, Colo.; San Francisco; Boston; and Portland, Ore., to name but a few) say that they are '420 friendly,' slang for marijuana use. References to 420 were nonexistent in other cities, including Little Rock, Ark.; Santa Fe, N.M.; and Boise, Idaho." Who knew Santa Fe was so square?" Trollderella 19:25, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Now that looks good. That is a reliable source supporting the idea that the number 420 is used to encourage cannabis smoker to rent. Thanks, good searching. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 19:44, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Thank you! Trollderella 19:46, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: 420 friendly

message: I have never heard of this before coming to this article which makes me think it is a North American thing unknown in the UK, Europe and other parts of the world. if this is the case it needs mentioning, SqueakBox 19:32, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it is a mostly north american thing, but I am not sure how this can be verified. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 19:47, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, would the onus be on the article to show that it was common elsewhere? Since all the refs come from North America, would it not be reasonable to assume this unless there was evidence that it existed elsewhere? Trollderella 19:51, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

text: One would need to cite that it happens elsewhere, if it made that claim. Likewise if it claims to be north american only then it would need to cite that. I beleive it is left unsaid right now. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 19:54, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You don't think it's a little misleading not to mention that no reported sightings of the term outside North America have come to light? Or at least, that all of the references on the page come from North America? Trollderella 21:03, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

text: No, not misleading. We are not an exhaustive source, just becuase we have not found it does not mean it does not exist. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 21:12, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I take your point, but we would not be claiming that is does not occur, simply pointing out that we have no evidence that it does. Trollderella 21:36, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

text: We avoid self refrences, meaning we don't use ourself as a source, and we try not to refer to ourselves in articles. Using the fact that we at wikipedia have not found something as the basis of a statement does not work. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 21:40, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Good work, existing citations already support it has north american origin. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 16:21, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: North America centred

message: In relation to the bill name, the Snopes article speculates that the bill's number "likely" was chosen for that reason. That's entirely possible, but it appears to be entirely the writer's speculation rather than anything that's sourced, and I don't see how any of the articles Snopes cites could possibly support that conclusion-they were all written before the bill was even in the works! Given that, I'd say a different source, which specifically states that the bill was done that way for that reason and gives some insight as to how they know that, is needed. Seraphimblade 21:36, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you, I tend to agree. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 21:38, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Third opinion

message: This short article should be merged into the more generalised Cannabis culture, also small. My reasons are preferring less rather than more articles as encyclopedic and it would, IMO, remove some of the badly sourced edits that are daily removed from the problem, SqueakBox 01:39, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I would say that both this article and the Cannabis culture article has alot of room force well soruced growth in the future. I don't think a merge is needed, removing unsourced info is always helpfull though. Hip makes a good point that 420 is a less global culture than general cannabis culture. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 14:35, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

text: I would vote for the articles to remain separate. 420 is a North American phenomenon, the cannabis culture entry should be retained for more widely shared aspects of stoner sociology. Hiplibrarianship 05:48, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge

message: How does the accepted origin of the term, dating from 1971, concur with Bob Dylan's stated claim (in 1978) that his song Rainy Day Women #12 & 35 references the term, since the latter dates from 1966? Shock, horror! Could Dylan have said something misleading?! It would seem worth a mention.Leberquesgue 20:48, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I took it out - the ref does not mention it at all. (*In a 1978 interview Bob Dylan admits his song "Rainy Day Women #12 & 35" references smoking marijuana. The reference to 420 is found when you multiply the numbers in the title. 12 x 35 = 420 ) Trollderella 02:50, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradiction in article? 

message: Mark 4:20 "Plant the seed and it shall grow." ref. Rastafari movement#Ganja --Anonymous 21:39, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with Anonymous.  This is most likely the origin of 420 and should be included as a possible origin. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.10.63.54 (talk • contribs) 21:34, January 21, 2007 (UTC)
You need to find a source to corroborate that. 420 has nothing to do with Rastafari, SqueakBox 05:36, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Ya, that would really need a source(Wikipedia does not use itself as a source), otherwise it is just one of hundreds of coincidences. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 14:53, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Ummm that would also need a source. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 20:22, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mark 4:20, could be a possibility of origin 

message: 420 is Indian slang for "swindler" and refers to Section 420 of the Indian penal code. This phrase is used often in India and is widely recognized (although not connected to pot....) A hugely popular Bollywood Indian film from 1955 was called "Shri 420". Wikipedia has an article on the film itself
Swatkind 04:23, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: 420 like marijuana itself comes from India?

message: A Crosby, Stills, Nash and Young song on the album Déjá Vu was writen by Stephen Stills and released on March 11th 1970, this could be a posible origin?? any one else agree?? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.29.233.122 (talk) 01:04, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  4 + 20 

message: * IMHO, the lyric is an overt reference to cannabis use, in a similar way as some of the other lyrics we have quoted in that section, I don't see any reason why that example shouldn't stay. Jdcooper 04:54, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Collie Buddz 

message: We should get this article onto the main page for 20th April, dont you think? SqueakBox 01:34, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Main page

message: Now that all the crap has been exorcised (which don't get me wrong is an ace development), shouldn't there be at least a sentence indicating how widespread the use of this term is, in a way substituting the stupid lists. Something like "Discreet references to cannabis via the use of the term are extremely common throughout North American culture, especially in hip hop and rock music, or whatever.", (obviously rewritten in non-hungover English) something to indicate the notability of the term. The list was a cruft-magnet, for sure, but removing the pop-culture references with no mention of them in their absence means the article doesnt really assert notability of the term at all. Or maybe it does, what does anyone reckon? Jdcooper 13:11, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Context