Talk:Peyote
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
CastaƱeda's works have largely been discredited as serious anthropological texts. Is that worth a note in THIS article or is the section on criticism in the CastaƱeda article enough? --Dante Alighieri 00:47 20 May 2003 (UTC)
- I just added a small note that Castaneda is considered by most to be fiction. --Bk0 04:04, 5 May 2004 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] dead link
I don't know if it should be removed completely, or if someone wants to go digging to find the proper link, but the link to the Canadian "Controlled Drugs And Substances Act" is no longer accurate.
- The first time you follow the link you are taken to an "Update Notice" page telling about a new technical environment for the Laws Web site. If you follow the http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/c-38.8/229687.html link at the bottom of the "Update Notice" page (or follow the "Controlled Drugs And Substances Act" link on the Peyote page a second time) you will see the correct page.
- Hvidberg 23:40, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Endangered
Shouldn't the taxobox contain some notice about the endangered status? 205.217.105.2 15:43, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- I don't know whether it is on any official government list of endangered plants (nor do I know if that matters as far as wikipedia's taxo box is concerned). The general consensus is that it is highly endangered in the wild, some even consider it a cultigen. --Bk0 01:08, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Drug Use
The information about mescaline is a little off topic and sounds like it condones the use of the drug. Consider revision.
- I do not see the paragraph either condoning or condemning. How would you change it? Haiduc 2 July 2005 10:45 (UTC)
It claims that set and setting can [i]guarantee[/i] a healthy trip. I think few would agree that such a guarantee is possible. -Ballzac
[edit] Anhalonium lewinii
I've seen Peyote referred to as Anhalonium lewinii, but Googling for it now there seems to be confusion wether it's just a type of Peyote, another name for it or if it's a seperate species. Does anybody know? 80.203.115.12 18:50, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
- Seems it's an obsoleted name. I'll make a redirect here. 80.203.115.12 18:50, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Peyote picture
Perhaps the image of Peyote on the bottom of the page should be removed. Not only does it look very bizarre and electric lime green, but it's a DEA photograph and thus doesn't send a very positive message about the sacred cactus. Wowbobwow12 05:08, 17 April 2006.
- To which image are you referring? Is it Image:Peyote.jpg? That one does have a bright almost lime-green color that is different from the other pictures here. It seems to be drawing, not a photo. I suppose we could remove that one. However, it's not the one that is labeled DEA. The one labeled as a DEA photograph ( Image:Peyote cactus and roots seized by DEA.jpg ) should stay because it is an accurate, informative picture of what Peyote looks like. It is not our job to send a "positive message about the sacrad cactus". Johntex\talk 17:14, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
- You are probably correct in that we have enough other higher-quality pictures that the DEA photo in question is no longer necessary. Remember Wikipedia's NPOV policy, however: the goal for all articles is to present the subject matter in a completely neutral manner, neither positive nor negative. --Bk0 (Talk) 17:17, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
-
- The DEA picture is an nth-generation copy of a photo, processed out of all recognition - it's gone beyond "poor" to "actively misleading". I see no encyclopedic value in it. Stan 22:39, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- Image removed :) - User:Skaterblo
-
[edit] Cleanup
This article needs split into sections and layed out as a 'proper' encyclopedia article. - User:Skaterblo
[edit] More botanical information
This entry seems to focus more on the chemical sides of this plant, rather than the actual details of it. Perhaps the entry should centre around the plant's surroundings and life, with the drug material as an afternote.
[edit] Irrelevant Phrase
There is a sentence at the end of the History section that reads, "Also check out our preview at boobs," which is a link to an article on breasts. Given the complete irrelevance, it is, I assume, a prank or vandalism, and I am removing it.
I have just tried to do an edit, and while the phrase in question appears on the page, it is invisible when I go to the edit mode. Can someone help me out?
[edit] How is it pronounced?
It'd be nice if one of you guys could add a sound bite to the article. I have no idea how it's pronounced, but guessing it's along the "coyote" lines. Anyone?
-It's pronounced as pee-oat-ee or pay-oat-ee
Being in spanish, the closest correct pronounciation written in english fashion would be Peh-yaw-teh (vowels as in "red" and "cotton"). NOT Pay-oat-ee
[edit] Peyotillo, Terminology, etc.
The article doesn't mention anything about the word "Peyote" being quite general, historically, only recently coming to mean L. williamsii specifically. The German Wikipedia also lists other cacti which were considered either Peyote or Peyotillo (False Peyote). They are:
- Ariocarpus fissuratus
- Ariocarpus kotschoubeyanus
- Ariocarpus retusus
- Astrophytum asterias
- Astrophytum capricorne
- Astrophytum myriostigma
- Aztekium ritterii
- Strombocactus disciformis
- Obregonia denegrii
- Pelecyphora aselliformis
- Mammillaria longimamma
- Mammillaria pectinifera
And I'd like to discuss the possibility of adding a section like this to the article, and maybe creating separate articles -- one to discuss Lophophora williamsii as a cactus from a botanical stadpoint and one to discuss Peyote more generally.
Stones1982 06:14, 26 February 2007 (UTC)