Talk:Cactus plugging

Flames

What does this line mean? Which plant? Did someone set it on fire? Was it spontaneous combustion?

The plant was destroyed in an outburst of flames in the summer of 2001.

Anyway, it was added by an unregistered user with a bunch of other stuff that has already been removed for being incorrect, so I'm taking it out as well. Jmeppley 01:04, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Illegality

I've removed part of the line on the illegality of plugging a saguaro. specifically the part dealing with its conservation status. At the moment Saguaro is NOT on the endangered species list. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.108.254.49 (talk) 21:11, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article still contains this claim, with a supporting source. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:33, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Cactus plugging. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.azda.gov/esd/NpRulesHome.aspx
Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.arhomeandgarden.org/plantoftheweek/articles/saguaro_cactus_12-12-08.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 07:59, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Notability (or, is this even really a thing?)

This article has already been tagged for relying a little too heavily on one source. I'd like to improve it, but I honestly can't find more sources to corroborate. UofA is the only source that actually uses the term "cactus plugging" as an activity and much of the internet is just parroting this wikipedia article in what may be an unfortunate example of self-fulfilling sourcing.

UofA may have been referencing a 1992 Phoenix New Times article article which seems to off-handedly refer to David Grundman's accident as a "cactus-plugging expedition" but it's unclear if this is in reference to a commonly-held term or just a flair of the author. Snopes does not use the term, nor does the Lounge Lizards' song. And the term is noticeably absent from many other sources on cactus vandalism:

New York Times. DEADLY WAR FOR LIFE OF ARIZONA CACTI. 1982
Baltimore Sun. Hands off the cactuses. 1996
Arizona Daily Star. When saguaros get up in arms, they might take deadly revenge. 2005
AZ Central. It's a sad but true tale: Man fatally crushed by saguaro. 2010
Arizona Public Media. Park Service Seeking Tips in Saguaro Shooting. 2017
ABC 15. Arrow through saguaro: police ask for help after cactus is vandalized. 2018

I realize absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence, but if there's fire, one would expect at least a little smoke. In good faith, I can't find a single source outside UofA and New Times that uses this term and isn't quoting Wikipedia. Can anyone help me out? Otherwise, I'd have to say that this term can only be sourced in trivial context and doesn't meet WP:GNG. Thank you. Scoundr3l (talk) 17:57, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure why that song by The Lounge Lizards is included as evidence of "cactus plugging" in Popular culture. The article was begun in 2003, but it seems the originator User:Wiwaxia is no longer with us. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:14, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That's a shame. It seems the original article was more about plugging a cactus full of explosives and blowing it up. Since then it's gone under serious renovations by User:TheRedPenOfDoom and yourself and most of that original context is gone. While not scientific, I threw "cactus plugging", "cactus-plugging", and "cacti plugging" in nGram and Google Trends and it returned no results. "Cactus shooting" seems to be a more successful search phrase, but not by much. As for the song, most of this article seems to be more about the David Grundman accident than the actual activity, so that's a potential for a merge or rename, I suppose. Scoundr3l (talk) 16:28, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Merger Proposal (Saguaro)

Based on recent discussion and investigation, I'd like to formally propose merging this article's content into the article on Saguaro. Reasons for proposed merger are notability concerns, overlap, and length. This article relies entirely on a trivial mention within a single source. The source wasn't written until after this article was created, leading to a possible chicken-and-egg scenario. Further, this article is short and mostly about the general legality of cactus vandalism, and one case in particular (involving a saguaro). As such, there is plenty of overlap and place to include this content on the Saguaro article (law subsection, or elsewhere). The phrase itself can be included on that article, although I would suggest it read "cactus vandalism, sometimes known as cactus plugging". Please let me know if there are any concerns or objections to this proposal. Thank you. Scoundr3l (talk) 18:46, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No objections. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:35, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Merged. Thank you. Scoundr3l (talk) 16:38, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]