Talk:List of chemical warfare agents

Military history: Technology / Weaponry CL‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

CL

This article has been rated as CL-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military science, technology, and theory task force
	Weaponry task force

Environment Mid‑importance

	Environment portal This environment-related article is part of the WikiProject Environment to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the environment. The aim is to write neutral and well-referenced articles on environment-related topics, as well as to ensure that environment articles are properly categorized. Read Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ and leave any messages at the project talk page.EnvironmentWikipedia:WikiProject EnvironmentTemplate:WikiProject EnvironmentEnvironment articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Request for move

I propose to move this page to "chemical warfare agents", sinc this is the name (correctly) used in the literature for the compounds in question. If we're talking legeal terms, it would be "Chemical Weapon" as in "Chemical Weapons Convention".

If no one objects to the move, I will do so by December 13, 2008. Greetinges, Lost Boy (talk) 14:31, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List?

Should this really be classified as a start class article? I think it should be a list-class. RockManQ ^(talk) 18:16, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I thought the same thing. I went ahead and changed it. --IvoShandor (talk) 19:54, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever, I couldn't care less. --IvoShandor (talk) 22:29, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Phenyldichloroarsine

Sources: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], --IvoShandor (talk) 20:07, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

More: [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15]

--IvoShandor (talk) 05:43, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Toxins as ABOs

From my understanding, toxins do NOT belong here. Although they are (more or less simple) molecules, as ABOs (Agents of Biological Origin) they are considered Biological Agents. I intend to take this out again or at least put in a clear indication that toxins are not CWAs. Opinions, anyone? Regards, Lost Boy (talk) 05:52, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]