Effects of the storage conditions on the stability of natural and synthetic cannabis in biological matrices for forensic toxicology analysis: An update from the literature

Archives

Archive 1 (Dec 2006 - Jan 2009) Archive 2 (Jan 2009 - Dec 2009) Archive 3 (Dec 2009 - Feb 2011) Archive 4 (Feb 2011 - Feb 2012) Archive 5 (Feb 2012 - Aug 2012) Archive 6 (Aug 2012 - Apr 2013) Archive 7 (Apr 2013 - Mar 2014) Archive 8 (Mar 2014 - Oct 2014) Archive 9 (Oct 2014 - Jan 2016) Archive 10 (Jan 2016 - Jan 2017) Archive 11 (Jan 2017 - Mar 2018) Archive 12 (Mar 2018 - Jun 2019) Archive 13 (Jun 2019 - Sep 2020) Archive 14 (Sep 2020 - Apr 2022 - Archive 15 (Apr 2022) - Archive 16 (?)

This page has archives. Sections older than 31 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

Welcome, welcome, welcome PamD! I'm glad that you are joining the drive! Please, have a cup of WikiTea, and go cite some articles.

	Women in Red Translation Contest
	Thank you for your additions July 2024 --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 00:30, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note for Talk Page Watchers: this is about edits to Lizzi Collinge and Louise Pryor.

Hi PamD. LinkedIn is not ok. It is non-rs and you keep using as though it is a valid secondary source. Its not. It a social media site and anything written by the person himself is WP:PRIMARY. scope_creep^Talk 08:05, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It should never be used in any WP:BLP in any instance. It a really poor choice to construct an article. scope_creep^Talk 08:07, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Scope creep The chain of links from WP:PRIMARY led me to WP:SELFPUB, which I read as allowing use of the subject's own LinkedIn page for simple hard facts like studies and previous employment, though it would not be used to establish notability. PamD 11:49, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To be more precise: WP:ABOUTSELF. PamD 11:52, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your rationalising it. I don't understand why those folk, wikipedia editor states such nonsense as though its valid. It shows a level of earnestness, ignorance and to a certain extent innocence that is not reflected in reality. Folk lie through their teeth all the time, particularly on social media sites. Their whole psychology is bent out of shape and that alters their perception leading them down paths in any other situation wouldn't happen. That is a known fact. Not a single line text is valid source. Even about a month and a half, two months ago there was a report in the times about folk on LinkedIn using AI to jack up their profiles. It so predominant and so widespread the site doesn't know what to do about it. I would sincerely like you not to use it. All its doing is adding work that needs to fixed later by somebody else, damaging the article in the short term and lowering the quality of the article in the present. If this was a new editor I would have moved that article to draft. It is a really poor choice. scope_creep^Talk

@Scope creep: I don't know what you mean by "rationalising". I am following the policy set out at WP:ABOUTSELF. I do not believe that it damages the quality of an article about an MP or a highly-regarded actuary, to WP:AGF and use their own LinkedIn page for checkable statements about their academic degrees and past employment. People in positions like that have too much to lose to consider "jacking up their profiles". We're not talking about some wannabe startup entrepreneur who might be tempted to inflate their profile. PamD 14:07, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your comment above, is what rationalising means. I'm not talking about some entrepreneur. The evidence is clear is day on this, even with people in power and if you looked, you'd find it. It happens all the time, and you can't mame an objective decision based on it, because you don't who is lying and who is not, until they are discovered (that is the real source, because its secondary). The whole thing is entirely subjective. Its the human condition, yet your rationalising it, that its somehow ok because the policy says so, even when its written by people who don't have a clue about it and honestly don't care. Using social media in this manner is one the biggest burden on Wikipedia editors time, to clean these article up. scope_creep^Talk 15:20, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not continue to "clean up" my policy-based edits. You have your opinions, but WP:ABOUTSELF is policy. Removing content without policy-based reason is disruptive editing. PamD 15:24, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		I was reading an article from quora which says Senior Wikipedia editors are unwelcoming and hateful which you proved wrong. Thanks you very much for going extra mile to edit and adjust the pages I created and for your constructive comments on how to continue on Wikipedia. Much love!!!Amistkilo (talk) 13:08, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you @Amistkilo: I try to be helpful. (But please don't forget to fix that second sentence of Scott Zeron which doesn't yet make sense!) PamD 13:13, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I will fix it. Thanks you! Amistkilo (talk) 13:15, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New pages patrol | September 2024 Backlog Drive
On 1 September 2024, a one-month backlog drive for new pages patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each article review will earn 1 point, and each redirect review will earn 0.2 points. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:10, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red | September 2024, Volume 10, Issue 9, Numbers 293, 294, 311, 316, 317 Online events: New: Women writers & their works | Geofocus: Islands A - H Continuing: #1day1woman | Education (year-long initiative) | Translation contest 2024 (Jul, Aug, Sep) Announcements from other communities August 30 is the tenth anniversary of WikiProject Women writers! Tip of the month: Try her pen name when searching for sources, and remember to add her to any of these that apply: List of pen names, List of literary initials, and Category:Pseudonymous women writers. Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events and add any general ideas on developing the project. Follow us on social media: Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter/X

--Rosiestep (talk) 19:02, 26 August 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

	Women in Red Translation Contest
	Thank you for your additions August 2024 --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 00:53, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's not just WP that puts "Mayor" in lower case when preceded by a modifier: go to google.com and search for site:thetimes.com "former mayor of london", or theguardian.com, which provides similar results. Happy editing! Chris the speller ^yack 14:20, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Chris the speller I still think it looks better with "M", but even my favourite style guide uses "m" so it's not a hill I'm bothered about fighting on! We are gloriously inconsistent, even when its not preceded by a modifier - search Wikipedia on "mayor London" to see. PamD 15:58, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]