Talk:Hash, Marihuana & Hemp Museum

Museum name

In all instances (from what I can tell), the museum's website spells marijuana with an "h". Should the article title reflect that? --Another Believer _(Talk) 05:38, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Since no one objected, I went ahead and changed the article title to include an "h". Feel free to discuss further if needed. --Another Believer _(Talk) 16:09, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Problems with the content of this article

With respect to the content of this lemma I do have some issues:

• Museum ... Well, this attraction seems to be educational and i do not mind to categorizing this in Wikipedia under museums. But as a commercial site, without any independent (academical or ethical) guidance, it seems very clear that this venue does not conform to standards or definitions of what makes up a museum. It is not recognized by the International Council of Museums (ICOM) or the Dutch Museumvereniging and it does not conform to the museum standards of Unesco and ICOM. I find it very misleading/deceiving that, without any nuance or question mark, this commercial thingy is unconditionally received here on Wikipedia as a "museum".
• De Wallen is not a clearly or officially defined neighbourhood. It stood for a larger area, but now seems to have become a synonym for the not really well defined Red Light District, and it is used here in that meaning. Only people who come that area as clients of prostitution and/or of hash shops would use "located in De Wallen, Amsterdam, Netherlands" as an indication of the location. This is not acceptable. It is located in the inner city of Amsterdam. Of course it is allright to mention that this attraction is quite in the Red Light District area. However this frasing in the first sentence is incorrect (and suggests that the person who wrote that sees Amsterdam solely from his own perspective as a prostitution/hash tourist).
• The mentioning of entrance prices seems not really compatible with Wikipedia policy for relevant information and is prone to be soon outdated (probably by now it is allready is not valid anymore). This should not be in an encyclopedia, most certainly not without an indication in which year this entrance fee was valid. Of course, when posible, website-addresses should be mentioned: The URL's are factual information and are generally valid for a longer time and a specific website will allmost everytime give the right opening times and entrance fees.
• The comma ... is grammatically correct in the title/name, after "Hash", but is it correct to use names/titles here that are not used outside of Wikipedia ?
• The paragraph "Reception" is very POV and not accordant to Wikipedia standards, The third and fourth sentence at least have a source. But the first and second sentence of this paragraph are sourceless and are very subjective and un-encyclopedical in content and in wording.

Yours, --Paulbe (talk) 00:53, 1 November 2016 (UTC)