Talk:Cannabis in South Africa

"private use of dagga applies only to home use and cultivation"

Legal to grow and smoke dagga in their own homes 30 March 2017. http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/how-the-western-cape-high-court-dagga-judgment-applies-to-you-20170331 http://citizen.co.za/news/news-national/1473818/users-can-now-grow-and-smoke-dagga-in-their-own-homes-court-rules/ Axxter99 (talk) 09:05, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

I have no idea how to tag IPA

But here's the pronunciaton for whoever knows how to do it: daχa

Why the fuck does Wikipedia have to be so fucking difficult to edit. FUCK AWildAppeared (talk) 08:37, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Daggafari: the South African cannabis sub-culture.

Please the the daggafari article and discuss how we could possible include an excerpt on this article.--MickeyDangerez (talk) 21:17, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

Merged content from daggafari

In light of the deletion discussion, User:MickeyDangerez has moved the content of that article here. I'd like us to try to keep the core facts in this article, while striving for an encyclopedic tone, rather than a journalistic tone, and giving due weight to the topic. I can see it as falling under the subheading of "activism". Let's be wary of original research, and use the Be bold, revert, discuss cycle to see if we can find consensus. I'm going to try to draw attention to this work so that we can get a number of eyes on the topic. It's likely that we will reach an impasse at some point, at which time we will hopefully have specific questions that we can resolve by using the request for comment process.

Let's all do our best to assume good faith on the part of other editors. Mickey is new to Wikipedia and frustrated with the processes, and some other editors will see this as an attempt to use Wikipedia as a soapbox for a neologism. There is hopefully some common ground here. It is impossible for all of us to be satisfied with the end result that we will get, but hopefully we'll have something that we can live with. --Slashme (talk) 19:22, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Thank you very much, Slashme, for your consideration and willingness to be extra accommodating getting the content in the right shape and in the right place. The burden of the processes has been extreme because I have great passion for all subjects of cannabis, after my short break from Wiki, I have found a new level of understanding as it can be very difficult when editing cannabis related content when you are emotionally connected to the cannabis culture, although I believe in my own conviction that I am handling my neutrality exceptionally well, guidance is always welcome. I am here in good faith and to represent truth, accuracy in our quest for ultimate knowledge <-(Complete Wikipedia). Preservation- Of all the content; the most important to preserve in my opinion is the history, the historical facts, events, etc. I would tell a lie if I said I do not care for the neologism, but I have been objective enough to realize it may not deserve it's own article yet. However if others can find any notability for inclusion as a paragraph in the final revision it will be welcomed but I will not hold anyone to that conviction. Please do try to reuse some of the content because everywhere referred to Daggafari it is synonymously meant as Dagga Culture. Therefor most of it is an accurate representation where the dagga culture of South Africa showed a clear sign of evolution with the creation of dagga related organisations, movements, unions, etc, in relation to world wide cannabis reform. This is all true and a accurate representation (dates etc). I welcome all the help, anyone can give to complete this work. As Slashme has mentioned the tone needs help as it has been written from a journalistic approach this is true. I have been reading a lot of wiki and try to imitate the style but it's not as easy as people may think and is probably why it takes years of edits to find symbiosis between yourself, your writing style and what is expected on Wikipedia. This cannot be learned in a month nor in 10 000 edits. Please take extra care on South African cannabis articles because it's easy for some to manipulate data and be missed in oversight because those who may oversee the editors do not have comprehensive knowledge on the the South African dagga culture and dagga developments and can easily be missed. I am sticking around to ensure that the oversight caused by the lack of "insider knowledge" of dagga in South Africa is not abused for self promotion or for distorting facts to suit any cannabis subject's political agendas and ensure all dagga subjects are historically & scientifically accurate & neutrally represented. Again, thank you to all the Wikipedians whom have made extra effort to accommodate the noob(me), highest regards. -- Mickey ☠ Dangerez 21:40, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

David Carradine, dagga, racism and the Apartheid State

I don't really see the relevance of the last sentence "However after he became an established actor and had changed his name to David, he was arrested, in 1967, for possession of marijuana." unless it is there in response to a claim made by Carradine that he never used cannabis before at the time of his arrest in South Africa or that he claimed back in 1967 that his arrest had to do with racism. None of the cited sources seem to be available online, so maybe Carradine make such a claim at the time of his 1980 arrest. Otherwise, this seems to be a bit WP:UNDUE and WP:SYN to imply that there's a connection to his claim of racism on behalf of the South African government and his previous arrest. As currently worded, I think the last sentence should go unless the connection between the two events is something reliable sources have discussed. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:02, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Highya, you should raise this issue first at the talk page of David Carradine as the content related to his cannabis incident was copied from there. --Mickey ☠ Dangerez 00:14, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

It was added to represent facts neutrally. He claims that it was a plot by Apartheid government who planted cannabis on his person however because he has been previously convicted of possession of marijuana could mean that the claim is unfound. Thus represents a neutral standing by giving the reader the facts to diseminate for further research. As his claim are made in his book and I am not sure if this topic has ever been discussed outside of his book. Maybe it can be worded differently but it's a direct copy from the original. --Mickey ☠ Dangerez 00:23, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Ths content on David Carradine relates to the entire life of David Carradine, whereas this sub-section relates to Carridine's arrest in South Africa. Wikipedia's voice cannot be used to imply there's a connection between the two which is not supported by reliable sources actually discussing such a connection. The content in David Carradine#Reports of arrests and prosecutions does not "combine" the two incidents like is done in this article; it treates them seperately as two independent events. That content, however, has been combined together here in this article a manner which is clearly WP:SYN. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:36, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

NO connection is made between the two, that does not already exits. The article is also about dagga (cannabis) and the information is therefore relevant to the topic. The addition creates a neutral statement is not using the voice of Wikipedia to do what it is you are accusing here. --Mickey ☠ Dangerez 10:57, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Obviously removing the last line would suit me as a member of the Dagga Culture but then it wouldn't be a neutral representation of the facts. And it is due to COI that I cannot vote in motion to remove this part. It would suit the agenda of my people and not represent all facts for a neutral view. This is not original research at all. As no claim is made only facts are stated which have already been verified as reliable on Wikipedia. --Mickey ☠ Dangerez 11:02, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

There is no connection between the two events, unless a reliable source can be provided which states there is. What happened in 1967 is not related to what 1980 other than they both involve Carradine and cannabis. Two sentences from two seperate paragraphs of another article have been taken and placed together in this article in a manner that implies there is some connection. Mentioning both events in the article about Carradine makes sense because the article is about him. They are covered in the same subsection, but treated as seperate events. It does not make sense in this article because this article is about cannabis in South Africa, so mentioning the 1980 arrest and Carradine's claim about racism may be fine, but that has nothing to do with 1967. Both statements may be factual and neutral, but combining (placing them one after the other) them as is done in the article is WP:SYN. -- Marchjuly (talk) 14:50, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Replace deleted history of dagga law & racism

There is no reason why the history of dagga & racism in South Africa should be removed.

Proposed addtional content

=== The history of dagga law and racism === ===== Between 1887 to 1949 ===== The first documented discussion of dagga in South Africa is found in the Natal Indian Immigrants Commission Report (RIIC) published in 1887, in which it is claimed that dagga is responsible for causing insanity amongst Indians. In this report Indians are referred to as "coolies": prohibiting the smoking, use, or possession by, and the sale, barter or gift to, any coolies whatsoever, of any portion of the hemp plant (cannabis sativa), and authorising the destruction thereof, if found in such use or possession, and imposing penalties upon coolies using, cultivating or possessing such plant for the purpose of smoking the same. The findings of the Indian Immigrant Commission Report framed the future debates on cannabis in South Africa. By 1891 cannabis is prohibited under Act 34 of 1891 in the Cape Colony. The South African Native Affairs Commission Report (SANAC) of 1905 includes native South Africans in the dagga debate and by 1908 the "Black-Peril" campaign is used to support the call for a ban on cannabis which succeeded in 1922 with the national prohibition on the cultivation, possession and use of cannabis. The law was briefly changed to exempt mine-workers, allowing them to cultivate, possess or use cannabis, but this exemption was eventually revoked to destabilize the National Union of Mine-workers. Before the national ban of 1922 it was legal for whites to cultivate, possess and use cannabis. In 1921 the Council of the League of Nations had called for an “Advisory Committee on the Traffic in Opium and Dangerous Drugs,” and it was in 1923 that South Africa wrote to this committee. The letter read as follows: "Pretoria November 28th 1923 With reference to your letter no. 12/A/22951/17217 dated September 6th 1922, on the above subject and to my letter no. 29/8/85 dated December last, forwarding copies of the Regulations promulgated under Proclamation no. 181 of 1922, I have the honour to inform you that, from the point of view of the Union of South Africa, the most important of all the habit-forming drugs is Indian Hemp or ‘Dagga’ and this drug is not included in the International List. It is suggested that the various Governments being parties to the International Opium Convention should be asked to include in their lists of habit-forming drugs the following: Indian hemp: including the whole or any portion of the plants cannabis indica or cannabis sativa. Signed, J.C. Van Tyen, for Secretary to the Prime Minister." This was accepted at the Second Opium Conference of 1924, and came into international law in 1925. ===== Other notable historic events regarding dagga and racism ===== ====== Son of Rhodesian Prime Minster arrested for dagga ====== On 20 December 1971 Alec Smith, the son of the Prime Minster of Rhodesia, Ian Smith, is arrested for the possession of 200 grams of dagga at the Mozambique border, after returning from vacation. Due to his conviction for dagga he was expelled from Rhodes University at the end of his first year in 1971. ====== David Carradine, dagga, racism and the Apartheid State ====== In 1980, while in South Africa filming Safari 3000 (also known as Rally), Carradine was arrested for possession of marijuana. He was convicted and given a suspended sentence. He claimed that he was framed by the apartheid government as he had been seen dancing with Tina Turner. However after he became an established actor and had changed his name to David, he was arrested, in 1967, for possession of marijuana. References

--Mickey ☠ Dangerez 17:21, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Restore & merge deleted content about the evolution & revolutions of the contemporary South African dagga culture

The following timeline of the evolution and revolution of the South African dagga culture. Should be restored and merged.

Proposed content to be merged/restored

=== The (r)evolution of the dagga culture: From pothead to daggafarian === Daggafarians celebrating 420 in the Maboneng precinct, Johannesburg Daggafarians attending the annual Cape Town Cannabis March. ==== Introduction ==== As a result of hundreds of years of stigma, racism and pseudo-scientific allegations against dagga there aren't many words in the Afrikaans language that associates neutrally or positively with the cannabis culture. Still today the word pothead or "daggakop" is generally used to insult and break down a person's character rather than identify a person with the cannabis culture. Even the term "cannabis smoker" or "daggarooker" is generally accompanied by a negative association in retrospect to a person's use of cannabis. Daggafari or Daggafarianism is a sub-culture of the cannabis culture that originated from the evolution and revolution of the dagga culture in contemporary South Africa as a result of the reformation of cannabis laws around the world in favor of the plant. In Daggafari anyone associated with the cannabis culture is known as a daggafarian, cannafarian or hempfarian. The term Daggafarian is a compound word created from the words, dagga and Rastafarian, and was first used in 2013 on a social media page. The term came into existence after a need arose for a colloquial term that identifies positively with the cannabis culture of South Africa regardless of a person's religion, race, language or social background, that still however emphasizes the word dagga without any negative connotations of its notorious history. With the use of this internationally recognizable term, because of the direct use of the word dagga in South African, as well as international news and publications as well as the influence and popularity of cannabis use of the rasta culture, the South African cannabis culture showed a clear evolution in reaction to continual reformation of cannabis laws around the world. === Formation of the Dagga Party === In February of 2009 Jeremy David Acton forms the first constituent of the Dagga Party of South Africa, in Cape Town, to represent the dagga culture as a South African political party. ==== Coronation of the Dagga Couple ==== In August of 2010 the raid and arrest of the South African couple, Julian Stobbs and Myrtle Clarke for the possession of cannabis made headline news where they were then referred to, by the media, as the Dagga Couple. Following the arrest the couple appeared in the Magistrate's court where they applied to be heard in the Constitutional Court. In May of 2011 the couple's affidavit is handed in at the North Gauteng High Court. In August 2011 charges of possession and dealing are struck off the roll at Magistrate’s Court, pending the outcome of the constitutional challenge and a summons is served to the seven departments of Government. By November 2011 the State file their intention to defend the charges. By January 2012 the State replied to the founding affidavit and in July of 2012 Doctors For Life apply to the Pretoria high Court as defendant number 8 for the State in the case. ==== Rise of the cannabis movement ==== On 17 January of 2013 the Dagga Movement of South Africa appears on social media creating awareness regarding the injustice of cannabis laws in South Africa. On 29 April 2013 the Dagga Movement created an online platform whereby participants could send a 21 day notice to various government departments including the President of South Africa in what was called the "Cannabis Awareness Drive: 21 Days Notice to Government". A total of 91 persons participated in the drive. The proclamation of dagga rights nor any other part of the notice was rebutted by government. ==== Unification of the dagga culture ==== On 3 May 2013 the Dagga Union of South Africa (DUSA) is formed by a Facebook group that would see their membership continue to grow past 20,265 members in August of 2017. On 20 April 2013 the dagga culture of South Africa came together, for the first time, to celebrate 4/20 in the Maboneng precinct, Johannesburg. This celebration is locally known as D-Day (Dagga Day). Three days after the D-Day celebration the Dagga Movement publishes guidelines for the use and description of the word Daggafarian on their website. ==== Relinquishing of Dagga Law Bill ==== On 24 April 2014 the first revision of the Relinquish Dagga Law Bill Rev. 1a is written by the fouding member of the Dagga Movement and Dagga Union of South Africa and is presented to the dagga culture as well as members of the Dagga Union of South Africa. By 24 September 2014 the bill is revised for the fourth time, resulting in two separate documents titled Relinquish Dagga Law Bill Rev. 1d and Dagga Regulation Bill Rev. 1b respectively. The bills were presented to Julius Sello Malema in a tweet with the hopes that it would be tabled in parliament, although this endeavor proved mostly unsuccessful it did result in Malema retweeting the Bill to his followers. ==== Dagga Ops ==== On 7 May 2015 the Dagga Magazine published the Dagga Ops Environmental Impact Assessment as received from the South African Police Service after filing a PAIA request to get access to the documents that give the SAPS Air Wing their mandate to aerial spray dagga crops with glyphosate in South Africa and the Transkei. ==== The ''Trial of the Plant'' ==== On 29 July 2017 the Constitutional challenge to legalise dagga started in Pretoria High Court. After a delayed start and nearly 3 weeks of expert testimony the case is postponed to 2018 to allow the plaintiffs time to study the 4000 pages of late evidence introduced by Doctors for Life. References

--Mickey ☠ Dangerez 17:26, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Slashme proposed merger of Daggafari to Cannabis in South Africa

Slashme created a redirect of Daggafari and suggested that some of the content be merged into Cannabis in South Africa in his AfD of Daggafari

--Mickey ☠ Dangerez 11:00, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

@MickeyDangerez: What someone proposes in a AfD discussion and how the discussion is eventually closed are not always the same. You should assume good faith that JamesBWatson saw the comments made about merging the content from Daggafari into this article and decided that was not the consensus of the discussion. If you feel that the closing administrator erred in their close, then you should follow the instructions in WP:CLOSECHALLENGE. You've asked for JamesBWatson to clarify his close at User talk:JamesBWatson/Open, but he hasn't edited that talk page in a few weeks. As it says at the very top of that page, "This page is used as a temporary alternative to my main talk page, when that page is protected due to vandalism." If you post a comment asking for clarification, you should be a little more patient than a waiting just a few hours and actually give the other person more time chance to respond. Try posting your query at User talk:JamesBWatson instead because he appears to be more active there. If his response is still not in favor of merging, then you have the option of asking others to review the close per WP:DRV. The Wikipedia community understands that mistakes will be made, and thus has established ways of dealing with them. Try and assume good faith and follow the process because continuing to revert administrators (even if you really truly believe you are in the right) is eventually going to be seen as WP:DE (or possibly WP:TE), and likely end up with someone starting an WP:ANI discussion about you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:05, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

How can you speak on behalf of another editor? How can you deduce what decision he has made. His comment on the removal of the content does not indicate it was in regards to the closing of the AfD, futhermore the consensus of the AfD was that neogolism Daggafari is not notable and not the content of the article especially those section that are the history of cannabis in South Africa. The issue was never with the historical content. Thus the outright removing the content is wrong and not in line with the consensus. In fact I did not challenge this, that is why I restored Slashme's orginal redirect before the AfD. Please raise an AfD or which every process governs content for removal as this is a secondary issue not raised by the AfD--Mickey ☠ Dangerez 12:38, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

---

Dissecting the edit note:

• "Removing content which clearly promoted a point of view, attempted to subvert a deletion discussion by posting the substance of the discussed article to another page, & contained various pieces of text seen in other places, apparently violating copyright." - JamesBWatson

-'Removing content which clearly promoted a point of view"

The historical content doesn't promote POV and is a neutral representation of the history regarding dagga Apartheid.

-'attempted to subvert a deletion discussion by posting the substance of the discussed article to another page'

Sounds like a serious accusation, however unfound. The merger was proposed before the AfD. I just acted in good faith by realising that the Neologism may not be notable enough to have its own article yet. I would like this accusation retracted or investigated for conclusion.

-'contained various pieces of text seen in other places, apparently violating copyright.'

I have since created a Wiki entry on dagga.za.net/wiki/Daggafari this cannot be seen as copyright violation. And all other content is fair use or is in the public domain.

--Mickey ☠ Dangerez 13:01, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

---

(edit conflict) In the edit sum he left when he removed the content, JamesBWatson wrote "attempted to subvert a deletion discussion by posting the substance of the discussed article to another page". However, you're right in that I cannot be 100% certain that the "deletion discussion" he is referring to is the one he closed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daggafari a few minutes after removing the merged content from this article. Anyway, my suggestion is still that you clarify this with him and follow WP:CLOSECHALLENGE, but that's your choice to make. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:03, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Maybe I will oppose the close to allow a redirect for Daggafari but the content in question was never part of the AfD. Only the Neologism was disussed and voted upon. Therefore as susgested the word Daggafari can be replaced with dagga culture (cannabis culture) and not then it would invalidate the AfD based on neologism. Hope that makes sense. --Mickey ☠ Dangerez 13:53, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

An AfD deals with an article in its entirety, not a particular section, a particular sentence, or a particular word. WP:NOTNEO was just one of the reasons given by the editor who nominated the article for deletion, and others were raised in comments by those who also !voted "delete". There was a !vote for "redirect" by Metropolitan90 which was subsequently stricken with the edit sum "recommend speedy delete". The comment made by Slashme here suggested further discussion on the article talk page (which seems reasonable), but Slashme did not strike or otherwise modify his/her nominating statement in any way. You can take this to deletin review, but it does seem to me that the consensus to delete was clear and that JamesBWatson's close was a rationale one based upon the comments posted. Read item 7 of the "Deletion Review should not be used" section of WP:CLOSECHALLENGE because this is what AlexEng suggested WT:AN#Why is It is easier for a noob to leave wiki than oppose an unfair delete. This might be something you should consider as well as a way to try and get the deleted content restored. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:22, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

What three institutions/organisations from which abusers can seek help

Can someone add information on at least three institutions or organizations abusers can seek help. Thire776 (talk) 14:34, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

Not going to happen as this is not a platform for assisting people with addiction issues. Robvanvee 15:39, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

You’re right! Help lines should be listed when dealing with medicine. Tigercultivations (talk) 17:22, 24 February 2022 (UTC)