Talk:R v Mernagh

On-mission?
I figure I'll open this discussion up rather than hide from the possibility of it coming up and resulting in a "no". Is R v Mernagh on-mission for RW? I skipped doing this in my userspace and just started it in mainspace. Nobody seems to have cared at the time or since, but I'd like input because this is about to blow up but huge, and in Canada with a not-signed-in Google search, our article is the first result. It is a legal battle against prohibition that by extension is coming up against Big Pharma (who would be very displeased if their expensive pharmaceuticals and all the R&D costs sunk into getting them on the market got replaced with grow-your-own pot). While medical marijuana/prohibition is not a pseudoscience/crank topic, maintaining prohibition to the point of deploying an illusory medical marijuana program to get Canadians off your back comes down as a pretty authoritarian thing (especially since the MMJ program was started in response to a constitutional challenge against the across-the-board prohibition that had previously been in place), and there is certainly going to be media reaction to the decision that will land in on-mission territory. Medical marijuana is also, to a degree, alternative medicine, since by default it is in opposition to Big Pharma, which places it in our purview, I would think. This particular article doesn't so much get into the apparent/proven(?) value of marijuana as medicine, but this is too big of a case to just jam into the ass end of the medical marijuana article and load it down with a big swing in focus.

I've tried to be reasonably thorough (so far; it's ongoing) without turning it into a Wikipedia-style article. It definitely has SPOV (S for snarky), and I'm looking forward to updating it with the outcome (released in a mere 8 hours) once I've managed to read the decision and wrapped my head around whatever the outcome is. Ochotonaprincepsnot a pokémon 09:18, 1 February 2013 (UTC)