Talk:Sleeping gas

Request for Comments - Article ought to be nominated for speedy deletion - concept of "sleeping gas" not notable
The concept of "sleeping gas" is not sufficiently distinct from general anesthetic to merit its own article.

Further, the lead paragraph which ought to define the concept of "sleeping gas" has NO references. Without such references, the reader must take the editors' word for the definition of "sleeping gas", so there are multiple issues here: WP:RS, WP:GNG and WP:NOR to mention a few.

If these deficiencies were capable of being addressed, I'd just do it, but I don't think the concept of "sleeping gas" is notable enough to merit its own wikipedia article. At most, the one reference given in the entire article might justify a section called "abuse of general anesthetics" in the article "General Anesthetic". To use the vernacular, "sleeping gas" isn't a "thing".

Comments? If someone can find reliable secondary sources which indicate the notability of the concept of "sleeping gas", now's the time to come forward.

Otherwise, I'll nominate the article for speedy deletion in a week unless we can find such evidence in reliable secondary sources of the subject's notability. loupgarous (talk) 07:50, 2 February 2017 (UTC)


 * If anyone's curious about the issue of notability and why's it's a problem with this article, see WP:GNG - the general notability guideline. I'm entirely willing to entertain the possibility that there are good secondary, wikipedia-acceptable sources which refer to "sleeping gas" as a discrete entity.   I just can't find them.


 * If you don't believe me, Google "sleeping gas". This article appears twice in the first page, once in wikipedia, and was cut-and-pasted as an answer to a question on Quora.com. All the other links are to YouTube videos, one related article here, Incapacitating agent, and other Q and A-type site pages like reference.com I don't think really meet WP:RS guidelines.  I've researched the topic for our articles Kolokol-1 and Moscow theater hostage crisis, so I know the information which is out on this topic (but will gladly defer to anyone who's got information I don't have - post now, or forever hold your peace).


 * The subject of this article is covered adequately in our articles Incapacitating agent and General anesthetic. Summing up, I don't see any sources meeting the WP:RS and WP:GNG guidelines to show that the term "sleeping gas" is notable enough in everyday use for its own wikipedia article.  The terms "Sleeping gas" and "Knockout gas" probably ought to redirect to the section of our article "Incapacitating agent" titled "Knockout gas", which ought to be updated with the one reference presented in this article, and with more complete information on the incapacitant used by Russian special operations forces to end the Moscow theater hostage crisis. loupgarous (talk) 00:13, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Sleeping gas


The article Sleeping gas has been proposed for deletion. The proposed deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

Proposed Redirection of Sleeping gas to Incapacitating agent
To all editors who are watching this page, I'm going to redirect Sleeping gas to Incapacitating agent probably in two days. I've added mentions of items formerly not contained in our article Incapacitating agent to assure the reader loses no content on being redirected to that article from Sleeping gas. I'd like to thank editors of our article Sleeping gas for their work on that article and congratulate you - your work has been central to making Incapacitating agent a more comprehensive and encyclopedic article, and wikipedia a better digital encyclopedia. If you have concerns or requests, please leave word here or at Talk:Incapacitating_agent. loupgarous (talk) 10:48, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Comment on term use
Sarin was a nerve agent that could be used as either an incapacitating agent or as a lethal agent. During the War in Southeast Asia, "Sleeping gas" was understood to be a euphemism for Sarin. Sources came out during Operation Tailwind investigation. I hope this helps in deciding. Please re-verify my sources before use. Johnvr4 (talk) 20:11, 4 April 2017 (UTC)


 * The Time/CNN story on "sleeping gas" was partially retracted, based on the faulty recollections of the retired admiral who was the source for the initial allegations, as reported in "CNN NewsStand Transcript for June 14, 1998".

" During our story last week, Admiral Moorer, chairman of the joint chiefs of staff in 1970, acknowledged to CNN that GB nerve gas had been used on Tailwind. Last Monday, he made an additional, clarifying statement to CNN.

"I did not authorize the use of sarin gas by U.S. military forces during Operation Tailwind in Laos in September 1970. As Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of staff at the time, I had no documents, operational orders, after-action reports or knowledge of the use of sarin. However, later in general discussions I learned of the operation, including verbal statements indicating the use of sarin on the Tailwind mission."
 * If we properly weight the article, quoting Adm. Moorer, it's reasonable, and we ought to have it in the article as another thing "sleeping gas" might mean.
 * Regarding Oliver and Smith's "Rebuttal to the Abrams/Kohler Report", most of it's behind a paywall. Thanks for your research! loupgarous (talk) 07:17, 8 February 2018 (UTC)