|WikiProject Chemistry||(Rated C-class, Low-importance)|
|This page was nominated for deletion on 20 July 2007. The result of the discussion was keep.|
"Initially designated K-84 and later renamed A-230." incomplete sentence. Does this refer to a specific Novichok agent, or all of them? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 15:52, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
This article is a bunch of bunk based on a single web page.
It is crap - I'm going to re write it later. I am a US Amy Chemical Officer with a degree in CBRNE studies. Everything EVERYTHING in this article is WRONG. For example, Novichock weapons aren't a gas at all (except for the vapors of binary VX maybe) These compounds are of high military importance, and the quality of this article needs to relfect that. How do I get started editing? The first thing I need to change is the header, and I can't do that.
- Your help would be very welcome. All you need to do to change the page is click on "edit this page" on the article page and make whichever edits you feel are necessary. I added some additional information to your own talk pag ethat you might find handy. Happy editing! – ClockworkSoul 19:35, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
- All I have about the Novichoks are two very uncertain formulas of two compounds that some sources claimed to be the Novichok agents so, here they go (SMILES):
Hope it helps, these were hard to find Best regards, onagrus (onagrus =AT= yahoo.com)
Careful. Wikipedia IMHO is supposed to be open literature; so don't get too close to things you're not supposed to talk about.Lost Boy 07:34, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
Granted chap, be aware though that the CWC is very specific in insisting on the co-operation of all countries and authorities to allow defence against agents. Discussion of defence not only should not be restricted but keeping such information secret could be viewed as a breach of the convention. It could even be construed that reticence by countries to reveal what they know of new agents is due to a number of factors from not knowing enough themselves, through to having no known detection or treatment.
Editing the "effects" section to include 2-pam chloride side of a NAAK. It might be a good idea to mention the CANA if we are going to expand this section into a "Treatment" type article. "NBCD Chief - You think your people are crazy?" 23:52, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
This page is all speculation or copying facts from a paranoid, unreliable source. Maybe this series of agents is fiction, maybe not, but there are NOT enough hard facts to support anything resembling an encyclopedic entry. Thoughts? Alvis 05:37, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
I agree with the quality of entries. However, be assured, it's not so much a fiction. Lost Boy 11:10, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
Articles which are submitted need to be substantiated. A russian newspaper isn't really reliable. This should be listed as being more of a rumor than fact, the Russians are notorious for making bullshit claims about their weapons systems , even claiming to have developed a gravity beam (janes) doomsday devices and gps jammers which were taken out by GPS guided JADAMS. By the way the US army atropline injector has 2 pan chloride which actively degrades organophospates. Atrophine does block the acetylcholnie receptor so the claim that atrophine would be ineffective just russian propoganda. In all speculative articles it should be noted that the strenght and capabilities of Russian weapons systems are more important to the internal stability of Russia, because the strenght of the Russian armed forces are directly part of Russian Nationalism. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Androm (talk • contribs) 01:40, 25 April 2007 (UTC).
The existence of Novichok agents has been openly admitted by Russian state authorities when they brought a criminal treason case against Mirzoyanov. According to expert witness testimonies of state prosecution, the agents did exist and therefore the disclosure by Mirzoyanov represents high treason. Mirzoyanov made his disclosure out of environmental concerns. He was a head of a counter-intelligence department and did measurements outside the CW facilities to make sure that foreign spies can not detect any traces of the production. To his horror, he found enormous amounts of CW that represented danger for people who lived there. The books by Birshein and Albats (reliable secondary sources) claim this to be a binary weapon. See this source: "the talk [by Mirzayanov] about binary weapons was no more than a verbal construct, an argument ex adverso, and only the MCC could corroborate or refute this natural assumption. By entangling V. S. Mirzayanov in investigation, the MCC [Russian Military Chemical Complex] confirmed the stated hypothesis, advancing it to the ranks of proven facts."  Biophys 04:12, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
Granted, this article needs more cleanup with nearly every entry. There's quite some fiction in it. However, the issue is quite hush-hush, so I don't expect fiction to be replaced by hard facts. This is BTW the reason why I voted for deletion; if you can't produce a substantiated article, better don't produce anything rather than a collection of fictous facts. Lost Boy 07:23, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
There are a lot of mistakes, but it can all be clarified if you take the time to read Vil Mirzayanov's new book "State Secrets: An Insider's Chronicle of the Russian Chemical Weapons Program" Published December 2008 by Outskirts Press. A lot of details about the Novichok program and some formulas are presented. Enjoy before they black out sections of this book! Periwinkle RTH (talk) 03:09, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
You can decide for yourself what can and cannot be substantiated. There is of course the circular argument used by Pickering - If Vil Mirzayanov lied, then why was he arrested? - Anyway, I will work on a short biography. I think this needs to be done, because people are beginning to read "State Secrets" now. Probably I am the only one who is able to do that properly at this point. (Gale Mirzayanov - wife)
I have added the IUPAC names of Novichok 5 & Novichok 7 with reference to their identification. They are the middle and right-hand compounds in the 4rd row of the first series of molecular images. I didn't give the IUPAC of the dioxaphospholane. Some people may think that specifying the agents and the synthesis as reckless but the information is in a published book and it only took me 5 minutes to find them so I don't think that this is increasing the risk of someone making them. The precursors themselves are very nasty and I would expect that attempting to order them would raise a red-flag. If I, as a non-expert in the field can find it, a dedicated terrorist would surely have no problem. Many analogues of the fluoro(nitrosomethane) make many analogues and so would require a large number of compounds to be suspect but of the 1,3,2-dioxaphospholanes, only 3 chemicals can be use thus offering a simple 'pinch point'. There synthesis requires methylphosphonous dichloride which is already controlled as a precursor for the synthesis of other nerve-agents and so there is already protection against undesirable elements obtaining it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 18:06, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
I checked the original russian test and the english texxt
O=P(OCCCl)(F)ON=C(F)Cl is A232 (Novichock relates to binary format). The Russians even give the CAS for them! It simply isn't a secret because to produce & weaponise the stuff (say 100Kg) would need something like a Buchi 200l pilot plant AND someone who knows how to us it and is willing to risk dying (the 2 binaries are both 4). Also, deeply suspicious who throws around their qualifications - there are more qualified people than YOU at the practical and for who a degree equates to highschool graduation. My Russian is Rusty but I will find the papers (they got leaked). How do I know it's the bottom one NOT from books? The precursors would include POF3 or PCH3F2 - both very verboten and watched. The Russians were REALLY careful NOT to break the moratorium on chemical weapons research. Vil Mirzayanov is at a US university and if HE considers your questions interesting - he will reply; VERY good manners. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 11:26, 19 September 2014 (UTC)