text:
Talk:Demographics of Greater China

Move
Why was this page moved? This is the only page that links to Demographics of mainland China so the purpose is defeated. I don't think this is necessary. --Jiang 04:39, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Summary style
Is there any particularly reason for this page to changed from summary style to disambiguation ? — Instantnood 22:24, August 27, 2005 (UTC)
 * If there's no particular reason, the summary style should better be restored. — Instantnood 19:02, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Quote article "According to the 2000 census, the TFR was 1.85 (0.86 for cities, 1.08 for towns and 1.43 for villages/outposts)." How can this be? 0.86, 1.08, and 1.43 cannot make a total of 1.85. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.80.179.6 (talk) 19:52, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

census results 2010
Where can I get census results 2010 year of People's Republic of China with ethnic population?--Kaiyr (talk) 02:38, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Move request

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was not moved. Consensus appears to stand pretty firmly in opposition to the proposal, with the general sense being that the title Demographics of China should reflect the location of the article on China. bd2412 T 01:43, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

– To conform with the majority of articles on Wikipedia, e.g. Military history of China. Jeremy (talk) 10:45, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Demographics of China → Demographics of the People's Republic of China
 * Demographics of Greater China → Demographics of China
 * Support -- This is an article about the area now govered by PRC. There is no reason to include the word "greater" in it, even if Sinkiang and Tibet are not (or were not) ethncially Chinese.  Peterkingiron (talk) 14:40, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

 * Support. China, People's Republic of China and Mainland China are different concepts. 119.237.156.246 (talk) 15:02, 19 March 2012 (UTC) blocked and banned as sock
 * Oppose this is a redirect. SchmuckyTheCat (talk)
 * Comment: In the course of the previous move request discussion in August 2011 it was reaffirmed that other articles, categories, etc., wouldn't be affected. This principle was reaffirmed in CfD in October 2011 and February 2012. But this article was moved. The move should be reverted. 119.237.156.246 (talk) 15:25, 19 March 2012 (UTC) blocked and banned as sock
 * Coincidentally that's promised by the pro-camp in Talk:ROC. Jeffrey (147.8.202.204) (talk) 07:22, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
 * The 'pro camp' made no such promises in either the ROC move request or the PRC move request. Individual editors may have done so on their own behalf, and are free to change their mind as new evidence is presented. This point is effectively 'sour grapes' and has nothing to do with the move request here. – NULL  ‹talk› ‹edits›  20:22, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose. The country is China so the article Demographics of China has the right name and is in the right place. As for Demographics of Greater China that currently is a redirect, and was before it was a summary article of different countries' demographics, not just that of China, so in either case moving it would be inappropriate.-- JohnBlackburne wordsdeeds 17:11, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
 * It was agreed that other articles should not be affected by the PRC → China move. 119.237.156.246 (talk) 17:49, 19 March 2012 (UTC) blocked and banned as sock
 * That's just a link to this page, and I don't see anything in the other discussions (two closed 'no consensus' so nothing was decided, the other was the page move to China which established that's the common name for the country).-- JohnBlackburne wordsdeeds 18:27, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment. Demographics of Greater China should not exist as an article. It should be a disambiguation page either at Demographics of China or Demographics of China (disambiguation).--Jiang (talk) 18:07, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
 * From what's mentioned above in this talk page this entry, currently an article with four short sections in summary style, had used to exist as a disambiguation page. 119.237.156.246 (talk) 18:17, 19 March 2012 (UTC) blocked and banned as sock
 * When? (Is there any SPI evidence, by the way?) Jeffrey (147.8.202.204) (talk) 07:22, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Ask one or both of the administrators who commented on the block directly. This question has nothing to do with the move request. – NULL  ‹talk› ‹edits›  20:22, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
 * There was simply no. 119.237.156.246 (talk) 17:04, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Er this article is a redirect... What the hell is being done here? -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 18:28, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I recently changed the article into a redirect as I saw no reason for its existence. It was orphaned anyway. If this seems to be controversial, then revert and go through the bureaucratic processes. If we had comprehensive Greater China statistics then perhaps there is a reason to keep it - anyone want to add the numbers? --Jiang (talk) 01:02, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
 * It's orphaned because it was moved to an unusual title. But Greater China definitely isn't the PRC by whatever meaning. Jeffrey (147.8.202.204) (talk) 07:22, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose. The community already agreed that 'China' means the People's Republic of China. I don't understand what other definition of 'China' you're using. Shrigley (talk) 20:53, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose - "China" is the title of the country article, so logically we should have "Demographics of China". "Demographics of the People's Republic of China" could be potentially confusing to the reader (...are China and the People's Republic of China different countries? if not, why different names? etc...). mge o  talk 21:44, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose. The main article was moved to "China", so the title of the demography article should correspond. Descriptive titles should be consistent with the corresponding main title, not with each other. A lot of "People's Republic of China" articles really need to be moved now. Kauffner (talk) 06:16, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Support, either as a disambig page or in the summary style. Jeffrey (147.8.202.204) (talk) 07:22, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose, this title is a redirect, and the Demographics of China article is correctly placed in reference to the country of China. – NULL  ‹talk› ‹edits›  13:35, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

 * Support. Consistency should applied across articles such as Culture of China, History of China, etc., where the word 'China' covers both Chinas of the divided China. Jeremy (talk) 10:29, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
 * The nominator doesn't generally vote on his own nomination, Jeremy. – NULL  ‹talk ‹edits›  01:48, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

 * It was a response on consistency. Jeremy (talk) 10:12, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Question The proposal is to...create a double redirect? I don't really think this redirect should exist at all, there's nothing it can really redirect to. CMD (talk) 14:45, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

 * Comment So, I'd like to close this. I've moved some of the other China-related articles. What do y'all think is the outcome here? I think that what is being asked here is that the previous version in history of Demographics of Greater China is supposed to become the new Demographics of China, and the current Demographics of China gets moved to Demographics of the People's Republic of China. Is that what the requestor wants? Are any of the opposers only opposing because the current Demographics of Greater China is a redirect? Do any of the opposers change to supporters if my clarification is correct? - UtherSRG (talk) 21:42, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Nothing should be moved. The existing article is fine in content and fine where it is. The other commenters (Shrigley, Kauffner, MadGeographer, NULL, JohnBlackburne) made that more explicit as their rationale. Myself, Eraserhead, and Chipmunkdavis all expressed reservations about it being a redirect. While I don't speak for the other two, I believe they are aware of the article's history and their comments express satisfaction with the current arrangement and surprise at the proposal. Nothing needs to be done except close this from further disruption. SchmuckyTheCat (talk) 04:27, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Notes to Move request March 2012
Please note that i) the red link to Talk:Republic of China/Archive 20 shall now read Talk:Taiwan/Archive 20 (since the talk page was moved along with the article), and ii) some of my comments were disruptively deleted or refactored by Schmucky and Null for no reason before the Move request was archived. Jeffrey (talk) 09:55, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
 * They were refracted because you kept mixing unnecessary notes with your edits. CMD (talk) 10:08, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

 * To repeat, I agreed not to add back the Unsigned tags. I did so without the Unsigned tags (except for one single tag since I posted a question to SchmuckyTheCat there), but no one bothered to read and went straight to revert blindly. Such blind reverts are disruptive. Jeffrey (talk) 16:40, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Jeffrey, you were blocked for 48 hours for being disruptive, and you are looking at a recommended month-long block because you still don't get that you're being disruptive. Three editors and two admins have told you you're being disruptive, maybe it's time you listened. – NULL  ‹talk› ‹edits›  21:59, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

 * Apparently no one actually noticed that the Unsigned tags were dropped. Or else they wouldn't have carried on blind reverts. Jeffrey (talk) 01:10, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Your reverts still contained the unsigned tags, which is why they were reverted. The edit history shows this clearly. – NULL  ‹talk› ‹edits›  01:14, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
 * You have been told umpteen times on several different pages why this particular one has to been kept. To repeat, it's because there's a question posted to Schmucky. Jeffrey (talk) 01:20, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
 * And you were told repeatedly not to do it. You persisted, you were reverted. Simple. – NULL  ‹talk› ‹edits›  01:21, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
 * No. No one ever challenged specifically about this single tag. You guys complained about all the Unsigned tags generally and then reverted blindly. Jeffrey (talk) 01:29, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
 * You were told not to add unsigned tags, period. That doesn't mean 'add them if you're going to reply', it means 'don't add them'. You were reverted consciously. – NULL  ‹talk› ‹edits›  05:55, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Do make some sense here my friend. That's much clearer to explain why I was posting such a question to Schmucky at that particular location. Jeffrey (talk) 17:53, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
 * That you think 'don't add the unsigned tags' doesn't make sense is very indicative of your overall conduct on Wikipedia. You lack WP:COMPETENCY. – NULL  ‹talk› ‹edits›  20:47, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
 * line 34. SchmuckyTheCat (talk)

Convert to Disambiguation or Conceptdab
The term 'Greater China' never means the country China. As Jiang had suggested above (at 18:07, 19 March 2012, and a bit relevant at 01:02, 20 March 2012), Demographics of Greater China should be a disambiguation page either at Demographics of China or Demographics of China (disambiguation). Should we convert it per his suggestion? Or should it be a Conceptdab page instead? I myself would prefer Conceptdab. Jeffrey (talk) 16:40, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
 * The term simply isn't used on Wikipedia. Since it was renamed, this title has been lucky to scrape 5 hits per day, and most of them have been because of the move discussion above. If anything, such an unused redirect should be deleted. – NULL  ‹talk› ‹edits›  21:55, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:Demographics of Greater China


text:
User talk:Sephiroth1988

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! BTW, I have to delete that test page, but thanks for the laugh. Please do, however, use the Sandbox for any further tests. Thank you. SWAdair | Talk 04:43, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: User talk:Sephiroth1988


text:
User:Nat Krause/licensing

I agree with the sentiments of my friend User:Pratyeka on this subject: "I hate all this licensing garbage - as far as I'm concerned just don't rip off other people's work for undue personal profit and share what you create. As some robot asked me to paste the following in to my user page, here it is.  I hope it makes the above common sense English crystal-clear to lawyer-types."

I agree to multi-license all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

I created this page primarily so that I wouldn't have those ugly category markers atop my user page. I'm considering whether I should just release everything into the public domain. I might switch to that later.

title: User:Nat Krause/licensing


text:
User:Alterego/Archive 1

User subpages
Hi alterego.

Your user subpages need to be suffixed by a User, to be in the user namespace. You previously created a user subpage in the main namespace by mistake.

welcome, newcomers and all that, though you seem to know your way around...

Dunc_Harris|☺ 15:36, 7 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Okie
Thanks.

Table and Letters
The top table in Myers-Briggs Type Indicator has letters left and right, words in the center. The top line appears to have the letters reversed: "E" goes with "Introversion" but "I" with "Extroversion." Is that the way they're supposed to be? Fg2 02:33, Sep 26, 2004 (UTC)

Whoops thanks :) They were flipped the wrong way before and I forgot to switch the words.

Signature
Hi, Alterego, welcome to Wikipedia. Please sign comments you make on talk pages. You can do this by using four tildes, like this: ~. --Lowellian 20:46, Oct 1, 2004 (UTC)

Move of List of people claiming to be deities
Please, next time you want to do an article move, use the move function, don't just cut and paste the text, as that way loses the page history. Thanks. Shane King 06:51, Nov 11, 2004 (UTC)

 * whoops. never noticed that up there :) Alterego 10/11/04

Hi - I saw your footnote proposal, and I'm guessing that making sure that people cite their sources is important to you. Please take a look at Village pump (proposals) at my proposal, "Remind people to cite sources while editing", and if you like it, please put in a good word for it. Thanks! -- Dwheeler 03:02, 2004 Dec 22 (UTC)

Footnotes / references
Hi I just made one of my rare visitors to the village pump and noticed that you are interested in references - in particular the template book reference I created. I always hoped that would lead on to greater things - though as I think you noted there has always been limitations (particularly the non-optionality of template parameters - such as templates for uniformizing other references and using footnotes appropriately. So if there is any major shift to work on this, I would be pleased to be involved. Pcb21| Pete 00:30, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Thanks. The recent software upgrade opened up the opportunity to make footnoting work well with just the two templates. I've listed the f1-f20 and f1b-f20b templates all for deletion, having moved all the articles that were using them to the new simple templates. Since you created them initially, I thought you may want to add a vote or comment supporting the new mechanism - see Templates for deletion. -- Netoholic @ 05:58, 2005 Jan 8 (UTC)

olympic image in commons
Hi, I'm trying to categorise your (great!) olympic picture over in commons, Is it from the 2004 opening ceremony?. I'd like to get it onto a proper article rather than just 'olympics' category. Thanks, Wombat 02:53, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC) (here and commons)
 * Hey. Most of the pictures i've uploaded are in articles. I'm not sure to which one you are referring, but its probably in a couple of them related to the olympics already. --Alterego 03:40, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)
 * Found it, its the flame at the opening ceremony one. Sorry, meant a article/category on commons, not here (going through the unused images list...). -- Wombat 07:31, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)

Edited your userpage
Hi there. Just wanted to let you know that I replaced with. The new one looks the exact same, and the old one is going to be deleted soon because it is redundant with the second (you can now use more than 5 of the same template per page). -Frazzydee|✍ 14:21, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Regarding your blog - urgent
Hi Alterego, I happened to read Angela's blog here where my name was mentioned. I wish to clarify my point to you. I never accepted Zen-master's conspiracy theory argument. I was only asking him proof by way of valid references.Please have a look at my edits here Talk:Google. Also, I've made detailed clarifications in your blog. I've nothing against you or Google. It appears that you've mistakenly thought I'm in favour of the conspiracy theory argument. I've also clarified here. Please take some time to go through all my clarifications and revise your blog accordingly. The mention of my name there along with all the arguments about the NSA theory makes acasual reader believe that I made the argument, which I did not. I make it clear that I don't buy the NSA conspiracy theory argument at all and my comments in that discussion pertain to other sections of the article like Google uses only Linux, Financing and IPO etc. Please update your blog indicating that I was never inserting POV into wikipedia as otherwise such an inaccurate fact will harm my reputation. Also, please change the title of your blog, because Yahoo has nothing to do with all these. Zen-master is not working here and I didn't insert the section. Please make all these clear. -- Sundar 05:58, Feb 7, 2005 (UTC)

 * Thanks Alterego for your timely correction on your blog. -- Sundar 06:19, Feb 7, 2005 (UTC)

Hi Alterego. Had some thoughts on the recent unfortunate imbroglio that we were in. Though the talk pages are technically under GFDL, I feel such issues ought to have been resolved within our talk pages itself. The problem with blogs is that the blogs don't have complete context, read and spinned off by many others, mirrored by many blog aggregators that do not simultaneously change when the blog gets revised and more importantly are indexed by search engines. The current issue anyway was a result of a misunderstanding, which could've been resolved very easily had we sought/gave clarifications. In any case, it has left an indelible mark (unpleasant) in me. It was definitely a damage to my online and to some extent offline reputation. I don't blame any individual for this because I should've also been more careful and clear. -- Sundar 06:00, Feb 8, 2005 (UTC)

 * I don't personally draw a dividing line between here and there. If it's online, anyone can read about it. Both my blog and the Google article's talk page are indexed by Yahoo, Google, and MSN etc...'s spiders. The information responds equally well to a search query in either place, no? My blog is a place for me to vent, ponder, and reflect, and considering the ludicrous nature of the claims made I did just that. I also believe in diffusion by detonation in cases where that seems appropriate.  --Alterego 06:28, Feb 8, 2005 (UTC)

AFIK, there are some pages in Wikipedia (probably User talk) that are off the limit spiders, but I was wrong about article discussion pages. But, the information doesn't respond equally well to a search query in both the places due to the complexities of ranking. There will be fewer inlinks to a discussion page from external domains as opposed to blogs. The audience for the talk pages might have better contextual information than blog readers who might've arrived more randomly than in the talk pages. Usually people end up in talk pages either after reading an article or something similiar (not usually from external domains directly).

I agree that those claims were ludicruous, but they weren't mine. But, I had to undergo a lot of agony, right? If any, you could've posted my critical statements, but would've definitely not attributed somebody else's edits to me if I'd clarified before, right? Also, I wasn't aware of the post until a friend pointed it out to me. If he hadn't, I wouldn't have been able to clarify. I take your point that I can't do NPOV edits to the article, but in many cases competing POV (factual) edits by people amenable to reason will aid NPOV. Any way, let's try to forget this issue. -- Sundar 06:48, Feb 8, 2005 (UTC)
 * Fair enough! --Alterego 06:50, Feb 8, 2005 (UTC)

Autonumbered footnotes.
Hi, following on from your Footnote2 proposal, I've made a somewhat similar new one with autonumbered footnotes at Footnote3. Could you please have a look and say how you like it. Mozzerati 13:39, 2005 Feb 20 (UTC)
 * hi, yeah i read that yesterday. i'm not exactly sure if I followed the example, but it seems that it has been proposed for a long time now and the reason it is not done is that it puts a lot of load on the server because it is dynamic. --Alterego 17:26, Feb 20, 2005 (UTC)

World population
It wasn't my edit, all I did was add the category as my edit summary suggests. It must be some sort of bug, as it's happened to me before. Xezbeth 19:37, Mar 6, 2005 (UTC)

Vector art
Re: vector art, what kind of sound icon are you talking about? silsor 17:27, Mar 12, 2005 (UTC)
 * hey silsor. i've had an idea on the backburner for a while to put sound clips in articles. so a tiny little speaker that just oozes "if you click me i make a sound" would help a lot. that's all i mean. it'd have to be as tiny as possible, but if it could also get scaled up to big that'd be a bonus --Alterego 22:05, Mar 12, 2005 (UTC)

Universism
Are you talking about the Bham Weekly article being generous? I agree it's too positive, there are many anti-universist views that should be included in such articles, but it's for real and here is the author's pedigree: http://www.writerstoolkit.com/AboutAuthor.htm Here is the Wikipedia article we are discussing: http://faithless.org/wikipedia.htm A suggested alternate Wikipedia article: http://www.universist.org/npovuniversistmovement.htm ...I just think Universism deserves an entry in Wikipedia, regardless of who writes it. Universist 21:00, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * I was talking specifically about the wikipedia article, and the place to discuss this is not my user page. Thank you. --Alterego 22:17, Mar 13, 2005 (UTC)
 * Ack sorry. Universist 00:05, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)

500,000th article
Thanks for notating it to the nearest second on Half-million pool, but which article was it? I don't know where to look for an official (or even unofficial) announcement. David Brooks 21:55, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Impossible to say! See my blog entry on it here. --Alterego 21:59, Mar 17, 2005 (UTC)
 * As you may have seen at Press_releases/March_2005 and Wikipedia talk:Half-million pool, Involuntary settlements in the Soviet Union was picked as the winner, based on your work. David Brooks 17:51, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * thanks for pointing that out. I posted a clarification on the talk page over there --Alterego 17:54, Mar 18, 2005 (UTC)

Image:BeerDayDubuque.JPG
Is Image:BeerDayDubuque.JPG, which you claim to have taken, licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License? --Ellmist 06:43, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * fixed --Alterego 06:47, Mar 21, 2005 (UTC)

Simplifying the disambiguation article for record...
66.167.138.211 03:37, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC):What exactly disturbed you about the pruning I did for record? Please respond on Talk:Record. The changes I made were done with the best intentions. Thank you.
 * fair enough --Alterego 03:39, Mar 28, 2005 (UTC)

Maurice Greene
Maurice Greene (the american athlete) is not gay, there has never been any mention of this anywhere. Somebody keeps changing his article saying that he is gay.

title: User:Alterego/Archive 1


text:
MG 08

The Maschinengewehr 08, or MG 08, was the German Army's standard machine gun in World War I and is an adaptation of Hiram S. Maxim's original 1884 Maxim gun. It was produced in a number of variants during the war. The MG 08 served during World War II as a heavy machine gun in many German infantry divisions, although by the end of the war it had mostly been relegated to second-rate fortress units.

The Maschinengewehr 08 (or MG 08)—so-named after 1908, its year of adoption—was a development of the license made Maschinengewehr 01. The firing rate depends on the lock assembly used and averages 500 rounds per minute for the Schloss 08 and 600 rounds per minute for the Schloss 16. Additional telescopic sights were also developed and used in quantity during World War I to enable the machine gun for its long-range direct fire and indirect fire support roles.

Development and adoption
The German Rifle Commission began firing tests of the Maxim gun at Zorndorf in 1889. In 1892, Ludwig Loewe's company signed a seven-year contract with Hiram Maxim for production of the gun in Berlin. The Imperial German Navy ordered Maxim guns from Loewe in 1894. The Navy deployed them on the decks of ships and for use in amphibious warfare. In 1896, Loewe founded a new subsidiary, the Deutsche Waffen- und Munitionsfabriken (DWM), to handle production. The agreement with Maxim concluded in 1898 and DWM received orders from Austria-Hungary, Argentina, Switzerland and Russia.

The Imperial German Army first considered using the Maxim gun as an artillery weapon The German light infantry Jäger troops began trials of the gun in 1898. The Guards Corps, II Corps and XVI Corps made more experiments in 1899. The tests produced a recommendation of independent six-gun detachments to march with the cavalry, with the guns mounted on carriages pulled by horses.

The Army purchased the modified MG 99 and MG 01 versions of the Maxim gun from DWM in limited quantities. The MG 99 introduced the sled mount that would remain standard in the MG 08. The MG 01 added lightweight spoked wheels, making possible the pushing and pulling of the weapon. The MG 01 was also exported to Chile and Bulgaria. By 1903, the German Army had 11 machine-gun detachments serving with cavalry divisions.

Criticisms of the MG 01 stressed its limited mobility and inability to keep up with the cavalry. The DWM and Spandau Arsenal developed the design further, decreasing weight by 7.7 kg, adding a detachable gun shield, an option for an optical sight, and removing the wheels. The result was the MG 08, which went into production at Spandau in 1908.

The German Army observed the effectiveness of the Maxim gun in the Russo-Japanese War of 1904–1905, many of them German exports. With the importance of the machine gun apparent, the Army asked for additional funding from the Reichstag to increase the supply of machine guns. After criticism of the request from Socialist deputies, the Army's demand for six guns per regiment was reduced to six guns per brigade in 1907. The Army Bill of 1912 finally gave the Army its demanded six guns per regiment. On 3 August 1914, soon after the outbreak of World War I, the Army had 4,411 MG 08s, along with 398 MG 01s, 18 MG 99s and two MG 09s.

At the onset of World War I, Germany developed an aerodynamically refined bullet intended for machine gun use. This 12.8 g full metal jacket s.S. (schweres Spitzgeschoß, "heavy spitzer bullet") boat tail projectile was loaded in the s.S. Patrone. The s.S. Patrone had an extreme range of approximately 4700 m. From its 1914 introduction the s.S. Patrone was mainly issued for aerial combat and as of 1918 in the later stages of World War I to infantry machine gunners.

Another early-WWI improvement introduced in 1915 was a muzzle booster, a patent-protected Vickers invention, which was designated Rückstossverstärker 08 S. Thanks to that MG 08 came up to its British and Russian analogs with their Vickers-licensed recoil boosters in its rate of fire (up from about 300-350 to 450-600 rds/min) and reliability.

Training and use
Training was regulated by the Field Service Regulations of 1908, providing the German Army six years to train with the guns before the outbreak of World War I.

Design details
The gun used 250-round fabric belts of 7.92×57mm ammunition. It was water-cooled, using a jacket around the barrel that held approximately 3.7 L of water. Using a separate attachment sight with range calculator for indirect fire, the MG 08 could be operated from cover.

The MG 08, like the Maxim gun, operated on the basis of short barrel recoil and a toggle lock. Once cocked and fired the MG 08 would continue firing rounds until the trigger was released or until all available ammunition was expended.

The standard iron sightline consisted of a blade front sight and a tangent rear sight with a V-notch, adjustable from 400 to 2000 m in 100 m increments. The Zielfernrohr 12 (ZF12) was an optional 2.5× power optical sight that featured a range setting wheel graduated 400 to 2000 m or 400 to 2600 m in 100 m increments. With the addition of clinometers fixed machine gun squads could set ranges of 800 to 3475 m and deliver plunging fire or indirect fire at more than 3000 m. This indirect firing method exploits the maximal effective range, that is defined by the maximum range of a small-arms projectile while still maintaining the minimum kinetic energy required to put unprotected personnel out of action, which is generally believed to be 15 kilogram-meters (147 J / 108 ft⋅lbf). Its practical range was estimated at some 2000 m up to an extreme range of 3500 m when firing the long-range s.S. Patrone.

The MG 08 was mounted on a sled mount (Schlittenlafette) that was ferried between locations either on carts or else carried above men's shoulders in the manner of a stretcher.

Pre-war production was by Deutsche Waffen und Munitionsfabriken (DWM) in Berlin and by the government Spandau arsenal (so the gun was often referred to as the Spandau MG 08). When the war began in August 1914, 4,411 MG 08s were available to battlefield units. Production at numerous factories was markedly ramped up during wartime. In 1914, some 200 MG 08s were produced each month, by 1916—once the weapon had established itself as the pre-eminent defensive battlefield weapon—the number had increased to 3,000; and in 1917 to 14,400 per month.

MG 08/15

The MG 08/15 was the "rather misguided attempt" at a lightened and thus more portable light machine gun from the standard MG 08, produced by "stepping-down" the upper rear and lower forward corners of the original MG 08's rectangular-outline receiver and breech assembly, and reducing the cooling jacket's diameter to 92.5 mm. It was tested as a prototype in 1915 by a team of weapon designers under the direction of an Oberst, Friedrich von Merkatz; this became the MG 08/15.

The MG 08/15 had been designed around the concept of portability, such as the French Chauchat, which meant that the firepower of a machine gun could be taken forward conveniently by assaulting troops, and moved between positions for tactical fire support; as such, the MG 08/15 was to be manned by two trained infantrymen, a shooter and an ammo bearer. In the attack the weapon would be fired on the move (marching fire) while on the defense the team would make use of the bipod from the prone position. To accomplish that, the MG 08/15 had a short bipod rather than a heavy four-legged sled mount, plus a wooden gunstock and a pistol grip. At 18 kg the MG 08/15 had minimal weight savings over the MG 08, being "a cumbersome beast to use in the assault." Intended to provide increased mobility of infantry automatic fire, it nevertheless remained a bulky water-cooled weapon that was quite demanding on the crews and never on par with its rivals, the Chauchat and the Lewis Gun. Accurate fire was difficult to achieve and usually in short bursts only. The fabric ammunition belts were prone to stretching and there were cartridge extraction problems when they were wet.

It was first introduced in battle during the French Second Battle of the Aisne (Chemin des Dames offensive) in April 1917. Deployment in increasingly large numbers with all front line infantry regiments continued in 1917 and during the German offensives of the spring and summer of 1918.

There were other, less prominent, German machine guns in WWI that showed more promising understanding of tactical firepower; such as the air-cooled 7.92 mm Bergmann MG 15nA which weighed "a more manageable 13kg," had a bipod mount and was fed from a 200-round metal-link belt contained in an assault drum instead of fabric belts. Despite its qualities, it was overshadowed by the production volumes of the MG 08/15 and exiled to secondary fronts, being largely relegated to use in limited numbers on the Italian Front. The Bergmann MG 15nA was also used by the Asien-Korps in Sinai, Mesopotamia and Palestine. Being air-cooled, the Bergmann MG 15nA's barrel would overheat after 250 rounds of sustained fire. Other light machine guns would maintain the water-cooling system, such as the Dreyse MG 10 and MG 15; with an air-cooled version produced just before the war, known as the Dreyse-Muskete or the MG 15.

Despite such developments, the MG 08/15 remained by far the most common German machine gun deployed in World War I, reaching a full allocation of six guns per company (72 guns per regiment) in 1918. By that time, there were four times as many MG 08/15 light machine guns than heavy MG 08 machine guns in each infantry regiment. To attain this goal, about 130,000 MG 08/15 were manufactured during World War I, most of them by the Spandau and Erfurt government arsenals. The heavy weight remained a problem though and a "futile attempt" to solve this problem was a late-war air-cooled version of the MG 08/15, designated as the MG 08/18; but it was only 1 kg lighter than the MG 08/15. The MG 08/18's barrel was heavier and it could not be quickly changed; inevitably overheating was a problem. It was battlefield tested in small numbers during the last months of the war. As noted, "the Maxim Gun was not a sound basis for an LMG."

Idiom
The designation 08/15 lives on as an idiom in colloquial German, nullachtfünfzehn (08/15 (Redewendung), pronounced Null-acht-fünfzehn), being used as a term to denote something totally ordinary and lacking in originality or specialness.

The name of the weapon (null-acht-fünfzehn) originally became a slang term in the German Army in the Second World War. Because of the 08/15's tendency to jam, German soldiers used the name of the gun to refer to any thing that went wrong in their Army experiences.

lMG 08
A lightened air-cooled version of the original water-cooled rectangular pattern-receiver MG 08 infantry automatic ordnance, the lMG 08, was developed by the Spandau arsenal as a rigidly mounted aircraft machine gun and went into production in 1915, in single-gun mounts, for use on the E.I through the E.III production versions of the Fokker Eindecker. A lower case letter "L" beginning the prefix meant luftgekühlt (air-cooled) rather than Luft (air).

The lMG 08s were later used in pairs by the time of the introduction of the Fokker D.III and Albatros D.I biplane fighters in 1916, as fixed and synchronized cowling guns firing through the propeller. The Parabellum MG14 built by DWM was a lighter (22 lbs) and quite different, air-cooled Maxim system gun with a very high rate of fire (600-700 rounds/min). It was introduced in 1915, and was, but not without serious problems on occasion (as noted by Otto Parschau), prototyped on Parschau's own A.16/15 Fokker A.III "green machine" monoplane with the Fokker Stangensteuerung gun synchronizer, received back with the synchronized Parabellum by Parschau on May 30, 1915 and first used in quantity as the synchronized forward-firing armament on the five examples of the Fokker M.5K/MG Eindecker production prototype aircraft, and soon afterwards served as a flexible aircraft observer's gun for rear defense.

The initial model of the air-cooled "Spandau" lMG 08 front-firing cowling machine guns had lost the stocks, grips, and bipods of the infantry MG 08s to adapt it to a fixed, forward-firing mount forward of an aircraft's cockpit, with gun synchronization allowing safe firing through a spinning propeller's arc. The 105 mm diameter cylindrical sheet metal water jacket used for the infantry's MG 08, an important support member for the barrel, was initially over-lightened with cooling slots, with fourteen rows of such slots completely surrounding and running the whole length of the jacket's circumferential sheetmetal.

These alternated between seven rows of nine "oblong" slots, alternating with seven more intervening rows of eight slots and twin round holes fore and aft of the slots apiece. Because of the important physical reinforcement provided by the cooling jacket on the MG 08 series of guns, the excessive slotting of the initial model of the air-cooled lMG 08 — amounting to slightly over 50% of the total area of the cylindrical cooling jacket's original circumferential sheetmetal — rendered the gun as too fragile, to the point of making it impossible to fit the muzzle booster that the water-cooled infantry MG 08 guns could be fitted with.

The later models of lMG 08 air-cooled machine gun variously "tweaked" the amount of slotting of the barrel by reducing the amount of sheet metal removed from it in minor ways through at least two or three trial formats, and eventually in the final versions produced, had the slotting omitted at the extreme ends of the cooling jacket's cylindrical member, with a 13 cm wide area of solid sheet metal at the breech end, and a 5 cm wide solid area at the muzzle end, giving the resultant gun much more rigidity. The lMG 08 also retained unchanged the rectangular rear receiver and breech assembly of the water-cooled MG 08 infantry weapon.

LMG 08/15

Later, the MG 08's receiver would be lightened by being "stepped down" at its upper-rear and lower-forward corners as the more refined and lighter weight LMG 08/15 version was developed, using the same airframe mounting geometry as the earlier ordnance to allow interchangeability between the earlier lMG 08 and later LMG 08/15 models, with the still well-perforated cooling jacket reduced to a 92.5 mm diameter. The LMG 08/15 was introduced in 1917.

The lMG 08 and LMG 08/15 guns were always used on fixed-wing aircraft, as fixed forward-aimed synchronized firing ordnance initially in single mounts for Germany's 1915-16 era Fokker Eindecker and Halberstadt D.II "scout" single-seat fighters, and by 1916 in dual mounts, first appearing on the mass-produced examples of Robert Thelen's Albatros D.I and D.II fighters in late 1916, and singly on German "C-class" armed two-seat observation aircraft for synchronized forward-firing armament. The usual ammunition load for fighters was for longer, 500 round, belts, one for each gun.

A device, occasionally fitted to the rear surface of the later LMG 08/15's receiver backplate, told the pilot how much ammunition was left to fire. Later on a significant upgrade to the gun's aerial usability was the fitting of the Klingstrom device on the right side of the receiver, which allowed the gun to be cocked and loaded with one hand from the cockpit. Various cocking/charging handle styles evolved with a simplified distinctive long handled cocking/charging device finally becoming preferred late in the war.

LMG 08/15's used the 30mm "two hole" ammunition belts of the flexible Parabellum MG14 machine gun rather than the wider "three hole" belts of the MG 08/15 water-cooled infantry weapon. It is possible that these belts were used as they were a bit lighter and less bulky than the wider "three hole" ground gun belts and certainly made for standardization which would have been easier for the armorers and in addition allowed for smaller and lighter "tubes" or "chutes" that guided the empty belts into storage containers in the aircraft after firing.

It is a common misconception that the tubes or chutes coming out of the fixed mounted aviation LMG 08/15 fixed guns were for expended cartridge cases. In actuality these attachments were for guiding the empty cartridge belts into a container inside the fuselage of the aircraft so that the belts would not interfere with the operation of the aircraft. As the entire MG 08 Spandau family of German machine guns ejected their empty cartridge cases forward through a round hole in the receiver's lower forward surface, immediately under the aft end of the barrel's cylindrical cooling-jacket (as can be clearly seen on many videos), these cartridge cases were guided out of the aircraft (except on Martin Kreutzer-designed Fokker biplane fighter aircraft, and the Fokker fighters designed by Kreutzer's successor Reinhold Platz) through tubes from under the barrel to the bottom of the fuselage. With Fokker designed aircraft following the Eindecker, the cartridge cases were ejected without tubes from the receiver hole directly into open trays that guided the tumbling cartridge cases backward and sideways onto the sloped fuselage decking, which then streamed down past the cockpit on either side. These trays are clearly visible in photographs but have rarely been recognized for their purpose. Hermann Göring, who flew both the Fokker Dr.I and Fokker D.VII was so annoyed with the case tumbling out in front of him that he had deflectors made on his aircraft to ensure the empty cartridge cases did not find their way into his cockpit. On photographs of Göring's aircraft these plates, seen only on his aircraft, are very prevalent and have even been recognized in scale models of his aircraft copying his particular planes, but even then most historians have failed to recognize their purpose. Both empty belt guides and trays were attached directly to the machine guns rather than to the aircraft. In the famous film showing Australian officers handling the LMG 08/15s from Baron von Richthofen's crashed triplane, the Fokker type belt tubes/chutes and empty cartridge trays can be clearly seen still attached to the guns.

More than 23,000 examples of the LMG 08/15 and an unknown number of the lMG 08 were produced during World War I.

Anti-tank and anti-aircraft variant
A variant chambered in the same 13.2 x 92 mm SR round as the 13.2 mm Mauser Anti-Tank Rifle was introduced in 1918. Designated MG 18 TuF, it was issued in limited numbers in late World War I.

Chinese version

Based on the commercial MG09, in 1935, the Chinese began to produce the derivative Type 24 Heavy machine gun, which was not based solely on German drawings and introduced several improvements and new features.

The Type 24 Heavy machine gun, first introduced to the National Revolutionary Army in 1935, designed to replace the original MG 08. It was the standard heavy machine gun for all Nationalists, Communists, and Warlords from 1935. They were usually made in the Hanyang Arsenal. Like the original MG 08, because of transportation difficulties, the M1917 Browning machine gun and other machine guns slowly replaced the Type 24 for the NRA after the Chinese Civil War. The PM M1910, and the SG-43 Goryunov (or Type 53/57 Machine gun) slowly replaced the Type 24 Heavy machine gun after the Chinese Civil War, but it was kept in service with the PLA, KPA and the NVA until the 1960s during the Vietnam War.

The Type 24 heavy machine gun's tripod resembles the tripod of the MG 08. This gun is not able to be mounted on sledge mounts. When aiming at enemy infantry, it usually comes with a muzzle disk. When used as an anti-aircraft gun, it uses a metal pole to make the tripod higher and usually does not come with a muzzle disk. The gun's receiver is similar to the MG 08's gun body. Like the original MG 08, it needs a crew of four.

The Type 24 heavy machine gun is chambered with the 7.92×57mm Mauser round, the standard Chinese military rifle cartridge of Nationalist China.

After the Chinese Civil War, People's Republic of China militia and reserve units converted a number of Type 24 HMG into the 7.62×54mmR Russian cartridge. They were used for training or as filming prop, and never entered service.

Users

 * Austria-Hungary
 * 🇦🇷 Argentina
 * 🇧🇪 Belgium
 * 🇧🇷 Brazil
 * 🇧🇬 Bulgaria
 * 🇨🇱 Chile
 * Czechoslovakia: The MG08/15 was in use after independence
 * 🇫🇮 Finland: MG-08 and MG-15 versions used by Finland as late as Continuation War.
 * 🇫🇷 France: MG-08 and 08/15 versions were captured and used by French forces in WW1 and afterwards.
 * German Empire
 * 🇮🇩 Indonesia: Used Chinese Type 24.
 * 🇱🇻 Latvia: At least 11 light-weight MG 08s used by the Latvian Army (by April 1936)
 * 🇱🇹 Lithuania: About 800 MG 08 (7,92 mm sunkusis kulkosvaidis 08 m.) and 520 MG 08/15 (7,92 mm lengvasis kulkosvaidis 08/15 m.). Some MG 08 were modernized for anti-aircraft defense.
 * Nazi Germany
 * 🇳🇱 Netherlands: Ex-German MG 08s confiscated at the end of WWI entered Dutch service in 1925 in the light anti-aircraft role, with the designation M.25.
 * Ottoman Empire
 * People's Republic of China: Produced the Type 24 under license.
 * 🇵🇱 Poland: From 1918-44, up to 5,964 MG 08 (ckm wz.08) and 7,775 MG 08/15 (lkm wz.08/15)
 * 🇲🇾 Malaysia: Used Chinese Type 24.
 * Manchukuo: Chinese-made Type 24s
 * Republic of China: Made under license as the Type 24 heavy machine gun. Imported MG08/15 machine guns also used during Second Sino-Japanese War.
 * Russian Empire
 * 🇨🇭 Switzerland
 * Spanish Republic
 * Vietnam: The Viet Minh used Chinese Type 24 during the First Indochina War, as did the Viet Cong during the Vietnam War.
 * Yugoslav Partisans
 * Yugoslav Partisans

Conflicts

 * Mexican Revolution
 * Xinhai Revolution
 * World War I
 * Russian Civil War
 * German Revolution
 * Finnish Civil War
 * Greater Poland Uprising
 * Silesian Uprisings
 * Polish–Soviet War
 * Spanish Civil War
 * Chinese Civil War
 * Second Sino-Japanese War
 * World War II
 * Korean War
 * First Indochina War
 * Vietnam War

Weapons of comparable role, performance and era

 * Bergmann MG15 nA Gun
 * M1917 Browning machine gun
 * Kjellman machine gun
 * Marlin M1917 & M1918 machine guns
 * Russian/Soviet PM M1910 machine gun
 * Schwarzlose MG M.07/12
 * Vickers machine gun

title: MG 08


text:
Bill Graves

William Preston Graves (born January 9, 1953) is an American former politician who was the 43rd governor of Kansas from 1995 until 2003.

Career
Graves was born in Salina, Kansas to parents who owned a trucking firm. After graduating from Kansas Wesleyan University with a business degree, he worked in human resources. In 1986, he was elected Kansas Secretary of State and in 1991, he was appointed as a representative of state governments to the Competitiveness Policy Council.

He defeated Democratic Congressman Jim Slattery in the Republican sweeping elections of 1994 at the age of 41, and became one of the youngest governors in Kansas history. A moderate Republican, Graves was known for his disputes with the conservative wing of the Kansas Republican Party. His term of office saw strong economic growth for Kansas after years of recession, and a continued emphasis on education. In 1997 Graves served as the Chairman of the Midwestern Governors Association.

He won re-election in 1998 with 74% of the vote, which was the largest margin of victory by any governor up for election in 1998, and one of the largest margins of victory in Kansas gubernatorial history. Graves was barred from running for a third term as governor by Kansas state law, and was succeeded by Democrat Kathleen Sebelius in January 2003. Serving with him as lieutenant governor were Sheila Frahm (1995–1996), whom he appointed to fill Bob Dole's seat in the Senate, and Gary Sherrer (1996–2003).

Following his tenure as governor, he has served as president of the American Trucking Associations.

Personal life
Bill Graves married Linda Richey in 1990, they have one daughter.

title: Bill Graves


text:
Gayle McKeachnie

Gayle F. McKeachnie (born January 26, 1943) is a Utah Republican politician and was the fifth lieutenant governor of Utah from 2003 until 2005.

Education
McKeachnie received his B.A. from the College of Southern Utah and his J.D. from the University of Utah. For a time, McKeachnie was an adjunct professor at Brigham Young University's J. Reuben Clark Law School.

Public office
McKeachnie was elected to four terms in the Utah State House of Representatives. From 1985 to 1986 he served as the majority whip for the Republican Party. After his service in the state legislature, McKeachnie served as the chairman of the board of trustees for Utah State University.

It was while serving as a university trustee that McKeachnie became Utah's fifth Lieutenant Governor. In October, 2003, Utah Governor Michael O. Leavitt resigned his office, having been appointed to a position in the Bush Administration. Leavitt was succeeded by his lieutenant governor, Olene S. Walker, and to fill the vacancy that she had left in the office of Lieutenant Governor, Walker appointed McKeachnie.

The Walker–McKeachnie administration was short-lived, however. In May 2004, at the Utah State Republican Convention, Walker failed to win her party's nomination to seek a full term, and in January 2005, both she and her lieutenant governor left office.

Today
Today, McKeachnie continues to be involved in Utah politics and policies. He is prominent in Utah as an expert on rural issues, including gas and oil-field discoveries. His expertise in both rural and energy issues makes him a highly sought-after advisor. McKeachnie served in the Huntsman administration as the leader of Rural Affairs and continues to do so in the Herbert administration. McKeachnie is also a close confidante of his successor as Lieutenant Governor, Gary Herbert, who served as Governor from 2009 to 2021.

McKeachnie also currently serves as a member of the Board overseeing the School and Institutional Trust Lands Association.

title: Gayle McKeachnie


text:
Talisa Soto

Talisa Soto (born March 27, 1967) is an American former actress and model. She is known for portraying Bond girl Lupe Lamora in the 1989 James Bond film Licence to Kill, and as Kitana in the 1995 fantasy action film Mortal Kombat and its 1997 sequel Mortal Kombat Annihilation. Prior to her acting career, Soto worked as a model, appearing in magazines such as Mademoiselle, Glamour and Elle.

Early life
Soto was born in Brooklyn, New York City, the youngest of four children of parents who moved to New York from Puerto Rico. During her early childhood, her parents moved to Northampton, Massachusetts, where Soto and her siblings were raised and educated in public schools.

Modeling
At age 15, Soto signed with Click Model Management and began modeling during summer vacations. Weeks after being signed, she traveled to Paris where she appeared in a layout for Vogue shot by Bruce Weber. Soto returned to Northampton after the summer to resume her schooling. She modeled only on occasion until after she graduated from high school.

She later was featured on the covers of American and British Vogue, British Elle, Mademoiselle, Glamour and Self magazines. Soto has also been featured in advertising campaigns for Calvin Klein, Cartier, Clarins, Revlon, Salvatore Ferragamo, Saks Fifth Avenue, and Versace.

Soto appeared in her first music video with former boyfriend Nick Kamen, behind Madonna's song "Each Time You Break My Heart", directed by Tony Viramontes. Soto and Kamen were often used as models by Ray Petri, the late fashion stylist and creator of the 1980s London "Buffalo Boy" look.

Acting
In 1988, when Soto returned to the United States, she auditioned and landed the role of "India" in her feature debut, Spike of Bensonhurst, a comedy starring Sasha Mitchell and Ernest Borgnine. In 1988, Soto was cast as Lupe Lamora, in the James Bond film Licence to Kill, starring Timothy Dalton, and as Maria Rivera in The Mambo Kings.

Soto appeared in more than twenty films, including Mortal Kombat (1995) as Kitana; Island of the Dead as Melissa O'Keefe; Piñero (2001) as Sugar, starring Benjamin Bratt; and Ballistic: Ecks vs. Sever (2002) as Ryne alongside Lucy Liu and Antonio Banderas. Soto also made two guest appearances on the television series C-16: FBI.

In 1995, she played the role of Doña Julia, Johnny Depp's first love interest in the tongue-in-cheek romantic comedy Don Juan DeMarco, Depp playing the title role. She also made an appearance in Marc Anthony's music video for "I Need to Know". In 1996, Soto played the title role in the campy film Vampirella based on the comic book character. Her last major film appearance was in Ballistic: Ecks vs. Sever before retiring from acting after marrying Benjamin Bratt.

She made one more film, La Mission (2009), which was directed by her brother-in-law Peter Bratt.

Public image
In 1990, Soto was chosen by People as one of the 50 Most Beautiful People in the World. In 1995, she was featured in the Sports Illustrated "Swimsuit Issue". She was ranked #58 on the Maxim Hot 100 Women of 2002.

Personal life
In 1997, Soto married actor Costas Mandylor. They divorced in 2000.

In 2002, she began dating actor  Benjamin Bratt; they married on April 13 in San Francisco. The two had met ten years earlier during a casting audition. During the filming of Piñero (2001) they began to develop a relationship. They married in April 2002 and their first child, daughter Sophia Rosalinda Bratt, was born on December 6, 2002; their second child, son Mateo Bravery Bratt, was born on October 3, 2005.

It was revealed in 2022 that Soto was diagnosed with breast cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic, but that she has since been deemed "cancer-free".

title: Talisa Soto


text:
Charles Duryea

Charles Edgar Duryea (December 15, 1861 – September 28, 1938) was an American engineer. He was the engineer of the first working American gasoline-powered car and co-founder of Duryea Motor Wagon Company. He was born near Canton, Illinois, a son of George Washington Duryea and Louisa Melvina Turner, and died in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, but spent most of his life working in Springfield, Massachusetts. It was in Springfield that Charles and his brother, Frank, produced and road-tested America’s first gasoline-powered car.

Biography
Charles Duryea was born on December 15, 1861, near Canton, Illinois, to George Washington Duryea and Louisa Melvina Turner.

Duryea and his brother Frank (1869–1967) were initially bicycle makers in Washington, D.C., but later became world-renowned as the first American gasoline-powered car manufacturers, headquartered in Springfield, Massachusetts. Their design was inspired by a Benz gasoline-powered car that Charles saw at a fair in Ohio. Generally speaking, Charles engineered the automobiles, while Frank built, tested and raced them.

Tests of the first American gasoline-powered automobile
On September 21, 1893, the Duryea brothers road-tested the first-ever, working American gasoline-powered automobile on the Howard Bemis farm in Chicopee, Massachusetts. The Duryea's "motor wagon" was a used horse drawn buggy that the brothers had purchased for $70 and into which they had installed a 4 HP, single cylinder gasoline engine. The car (buggy) had a friction transmission, spray carburetor and low tension ignition. Frank Duryea test drove it again on November 10 — this time in a prominent location: past their garage at 47 Taylor Street in Springfield. The next day it was reported by The Republican newspaper with great fanfare.

This particular car was put into storage in 1894 and stayed there until 1920, when it was rescued by a former Duryea engineer Inglis M. Uppercu and presented to the United States National Museum.

The Duryea Motor Wagon Company
On November 28, 1895, in Chicago, their vehicle, driven by brother Frank, had won America's first car race. It ran to Evanston, Illinois and back. The only other finisher was one of three Benz cars mostly made in Germany. After Frank won, demand grew for the Duryea Motor Wagon. In 1896, the Duryea Brothers produced 13 cars by hand – in their garage at 47 Taylor Street – and thus Duryea became the first-ever commercially produced vehicle, and also the largest automobile factory in the United States. For the history of the company and its cars, see Duryea Motor Wagon Company.

Duryea sought out investors and buyers while his brother, Frank Duryea, primarily handled the mechanical side of the business.

A Duryea car was involved in America's first known auto accident. New York City motorist Henry Wells hit a bicyclist with his new Duryea. The rider suffered a broken leg, Wells spent a night in jail and the nation's first traffic accident was recorded in March 1896. In 1913, George Vanderbilt purchased and drove a Stevens-Duryea, but was one of few people in the United States who could afford one. His 1913 Duryea is Vanderbilt's only original car kept at his Biltmore Estate.

Duryea ceased manufacturing in 1917.

Duryea died of a heart attack in Philadelphia on September 28, 1938, and was buried in Ivy Hill Cemetery, West Oak Lane.

Legacy
Duryea was inducted into the Automotive Hall of Fame in 1973.

The annual Duryea Hillclimb is named in his honor.

The Charles Duryea Residence (located in Peoria's historic West Bluff district) was named a City of Peoria Historical Landmark in July 2015; automobiles were manufactured in a barn on the property, which is no longer standing. An automobile built in Duryea's barn in 1898 is on permanent display at the Peoria Riverfront Museum.

title: Charles Duryea


text:
Talk:Zopiclone

Military study section
While it was an interest study and definitely relevant to the article, I thought that section needs a better breakdown of the findings. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jjamieallen (talk • contribs) 21:13, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Private/NHS use
''Zopiclone is the preferred drug prescribed by the NHS for insomnia in the United Kingdom. Other 'Z-Drugs' are only ever prescribed privately.'' - I've removed the second claim as Zapelon and Zolpidem and available on the NHS, something you can confirm by checking their entries in the BNF. Also I have an NHS prescription for Zolpidem and a friend of mine has one for Zapelon, so I'm quite certain they are not 'only ever prescribed privately'. Can anyone provide a reference for the first claim? Ian Gottherd (talk) 22:20, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Eszopiclone and zopiclone
Zopiclone is identical to eszopiclone, aside from the fact that it has an extra 50% inactive "filler" -- namely, the inactive isomer of the drug. Therefore, most of its properties are idential to eszopiclone, so I have copied many of the properties from that entry. Bushing 15:35, 3 December 2005 (UTC).

 * I actually find this to be outrageous (that a company can patent a generically-available medicine and sell it at inflated prices in the U.S.). Is there any kind of legal action that can be taken, on the basis that the drug in its slightly altered form offers no tangible benefits over the generic? Historian932 (talk) 15:47, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
 * You could try to get the patent system changed, but I suspect there might be some opposition from drug companies (see Generic drug for some history). Nobody's forced to use the new version that I know of. I find it more interesting that drug companies can so successfully market what is sometimes "just an overpriced form of an existing generic": there's some value in not taking a chemical you don't need, and there's a heck of a lot of money spent on marketing and convincing doctors and patients that this new thing is so much better. Given how many people will pay extra for a brand-name on the same active ingredient as a generic, maybe I should not be surprised:( DMacks (talk) 16:32, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
 * The inactive "filler" (R-zopiclone)is the carcinogen. Hence why the FDA will not approve of the drug, which is actually quite a reverse to the status quo.  It is usually more difficult to approve a drug in Europe than in the US.  Also, the US version is not "slightly altered."  You have to remove ~50% of the substance (the R-Zopiclone from the eszopiclone) which with any chemical can be a highly complex process.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.99.65.63 (talk) 21:11, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Please cite your reference for the inactive "filler" (R-Zopiclone) as being a known carcinogen. The R-Zopiclone is one of the isomers created in the production of Zopiclone and has been linked to some side effects, hence the reason it is removed. In that regard, Eszopiclone may be more beneficial than Zopiclone, and costs more to produce, hence the reason you have to pay extra for it. Individual isomers of racemic drug mixtures are individually patentable in the US. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.29.45.226 (talk) 21:06, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Blurred vision?
I've asked a pharmacist to look up vision related side effects for Zopiclone, and he has indicated to me the only one that's on that big heavy text is ambiyopia - dimmed vision. Ambiyopia is can be specific to dimmed vision at night, and may be caused by toxicity, or by (in this case) prescription drugs. There's no word that blurred vision is in that list. 142.58.101.27 02:29, 28 March 2006 (UTC).

Blurred vision could be due to the dehydration and the associated swelling, it's something that can affect your eyesight as well. --Snowgrouse 19:24, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Currently on this funky tablet before bed, feeling abit dizzy though and wikipedia edited has proved difficult. JHJPDJKDKHI! 07:08, 2 April 2006 (UTC).

Specific claim in need of a specific citation
A statement as specific as this really needs to be verified directly with a specific reference: "The risk of dependency on zopiclone when used for less than 4 weeks or used occasionally is very low." If a direct citation for this can't be found, it should be removed from the article. - Pacula 19:03, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

 * How about this for a source? It suggests that Zopiclone has a low addiction level if taken in therapeutic doses for a few weeks, and the statement is supported by citing the following two studies:

1. Wadworth AN, McTavish D. Zopiclone: a review of its pharmacological properties and therapeutic efficacy as a hypnotic. Drugs & Aging 1993;3:441-59.

2. Lader M. Zopiclone: is there any dependence and abuse potential? J Neurol 1997;244:S18-S22. Albert Wincentz (talk) 17:46, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

 * not a great cite, but the patient information leaflet for zopiclone in the UK says "If you are taking any medicines belonging to the hypnotic group there is a possibility that you may become dependant on them However, with Zimovane this possibility is small."  I'm not sure what rules guide what info they can put into leaflets. :-/  Dan Beale-Cocks  21:18, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

The WHO review of zopiclone in 2006 seems to indicate that problems with dependence, withdrawal, driving, side effects, etc. are dose-related. I would like this article to address the issue of dosage more clearly. May 2012 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.108.5.204 (talk) 07:00, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Lunesta in U.S. only
The article states that eszopiclone is sold in North America whereas zopiclone is available in Europe. In fact, zopiclone is sold in Canada as well, where eszopiclone is unavailable. Puck35 (talk) 03:51, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

overdose
The first sentence in this section has a misleading citation. The reference cites a SINGLE incident of a person with a history of suicidal ideation who drowned. This person had high levels of zopiclone and a benzodiazepine according to the toxicology report. This statement should be revised or removed as it is not properly cited. It is misleading to use this citation as it is clearly not the intent of the author to make a sweeping claim linking zopiclone and suicide- the article in question is a case study. In fact, the title of this citation refers to it as an "uncommon case".Angemedic (talk) 10:53, 18 December 2010 (UTC)Angemedic

Overdose of zopiclone may present with excessive sedation, depressed respiratory function which may progress to coma and possibly death. - is there any cite for the coma or death part of this? I'm not aware of anyone ever anywhere dying from zopiclone overdose. Zopiclone is used quite a lot in UK mental health trusts because it's "so safe". Dan Beale-Cocks 21:23, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

 * I've found a few cites showing zopiclone used in overdose - 78 year old 350mg zopiclone only, contributory, not cause of death. I was going to remove the death bit, but I won't now.  Dan Beale-Cocks  10:53, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

 * Indeed, there are plenty of source showing zopiclone is the primary cause of overdose death. :-( Dan Beale-Cocks  21:05, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Cancer
There is no citation re zopiclone and ovarian cancer. On the benzo addication page reference is made to z-drugs and ovarian cancer- two different studies showed opposing results. Due to personal experience with ovarian cancer, I have read quite a bit of literature regarding the pathophysiology of this disease and while OC is commonly linked with smoking, genetics, hormonal birth control use, hormone replacement therapy and environment, I have never seen anything linking it with z-drug or benzo use. The above statement should be revised or removed due to its being misleading- single studies should not be used as citations when making sweeping claims about the etiology of any cancer. If the purported link between this drug and OC is factual and conclusive there should be solid evidence to back it up. Angemedic (talk) 10:54, 18 December 2010 (UTC)Angemedic

This study - Incidence of Cancer in Individuals Receiving Chronic Zopiclone or Eszopiclone Requires Prospective Study does say that, uh, the incidence of cancer in people getting zopiclone long-term needs to be studied, but it doesn't say that they found "an increase in cancer rates" in people with HIV/AIDS who had been given zopiclone. It's hard to see how relevant the animal studies are: [. . .]and carcinomas in males were seen, at the highest dose of 100 mg/kg/d. While this is considerably above a typical human daily dose, the mechanism for this increase in mammary tumors is unknown. The thyroid tumors are thought to increase levels of thyroid stimulating hormone via a mechanism not thought to be relevant to humans [. . .] though once again, the relevance to humans of these data are questioned. Since the study is uncontrolled - no double blinds or control groups etc - it's not suitable for this article to say "zopiclone causes cancer in immuno-suppressed patients". Dan Beale-Cocks 21:11, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I printed off the article and took it to work and showed it to a physician and they tended to agree with you that the study did not conclusively state whether zopiclone caused cancer or not and only raised concerns of possible cancer warranting further study etc. I am happy with your rewording of my edit by yourself. Thank you for bringing my misinterpretation of the article to my attention.--Stilldoggy (talk) 01:05, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

 * Removed a paragraph of uncited claims that 'zoplicone causes cancer' and similar conclusions re the discussion above. A quick reminder: Wikipedia policy is that such inclusions MUST be verified by relevant and reliable data, with directions embedded in the text to its listing at the end of the article - and if not, it stays out. Plutonium27 (talk) 20:54, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Those claims were cited that you removed, check the reference. The above conversation was in regard to the first reference. The above conversation was resolved. I am reverting your edits because it is cited data.-- Literature geek |  T@1k?  00:19, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
 * The next para down went on to give the cited/verifiable info that there have been investigations into a possible link that cannot be discounted. Fine, no problem with that. This is superficially a repeat of the para I removed but is instead the more accurate one as the cited data does not conclude that "zopiclone causes cancer". That statement is implying that if you take zopiclone, you'll get cancer. Which is misleading. The rest of the para I struck out because the info was repeated, more clearly, in that following one; however I've no problem with that going back, although the statements regarding the FDA need to be supported inline. But I think the line "zopiclone causes cancer" is still a problem, though. The cited reference does not support it imho. Plutonium27 (talk) 11:57, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

I can see your point about it being potentially misleading to the reader in that some readers may think that the statement means that if they take zopiclone they will 100% get cancer. I changed the wording to make sure the reader understands that it is talking in terms of increased risk/chance of developing cancer.-- Literature geek |  T@1k?  21:34, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

GABAa receptors
According to this paper, the terms "BZ receptor" or "GABA/BZ receptor" or "omega receptor" should no longer be used. They recommend the term benzodiazepine site. There has been a bit of a disagreement with an editor on this zopiclone article over this and he has reverted me. The section in GABAA_receptor was a total misrepresentation of the cited reference which the editor I believe was using as a "reference". I spent an hour reading the full text reference and after reading it I fixed the offending paragraph in GABAA_receptor wiki article.-- Literature geek |  T@1k?  01:58, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

UK Legal Status
I have changed the UK legal status; as Zopiclone is a 'Class C' controlled substance in the United Kingdom. :) Dvmedis (talk) 21:43, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

 * Is there a source for this? Zopiclone is a prescription only medication in England, but it does not appear on this UK government list of controlled medications, and this 2004 link says that zolpiden is one the list but zopiclone is not. NotAnIP83:149:66:11 (talk) 22:09, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

SOLD AS naming?
The brand name in the UK is Zimovane. But that doesn't mean the medication is sold as Zimovane in the UK. So, is there a fix for the first sentence?

"Zopiclone, sold as Imovane in Canada, and Zimovane in the UK" is misleading. People in England will get what their local health authority put on the list of cheapest versions, which may be the generics or may be Zimovane. I have no idea what happens in Wales or Scotland, as their health care has been devolved. NotAnIP83:149:66:11 (talk) 20:15, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Prescription drugs are generally not 'sold' as anything in the UK, where it is illegal for drug companies to market prescription drugs directly to patients. NHS prescriptions are almost always written generically, and the pharmacist will dispense the cheapest version available. --Ef80 (talk) 00:27, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Fcalon99 (talk) 16:39, 12 February 2022 (UTC)== Zopiclone negative reviewed for benefit of other meds? ==

It's really stunning that almost this whole wiki is full of negative health info about Zopiclone.

Look for example to the Zolpidem wiki. Is this industry that has more interest?

However, Zopiclone betters Slow Wave deep sleep / delta waves. Zolpidem doesn't do that, but betters REM sleep. Based on this article, I first refused an offer from my doctor for Zopiclone and insisted for Zolpidem. But after a second discussion with my doctor, I analysed the sleep wiki and that both Zolpidem and Zopiclone have advantages over eachother. Rigth now I use half tab Zopiclone for the first half of the night and another half tab of Zolpidem for the second, as this seems to better imitate normal healthy sleep.

Its hardly to find these facts through this almost anti-zopiclone propaganda. 190.10.21.230 (talk) 23:48, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Maybe put this article and its negative reporting in-line with the way other sleep med wiki's are formulated...? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.10.21.230 (talk) 23:26, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Ys; look to the wiki of its isomere: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eszopiclone That is sold for more money and is not that negative as this wiki. 190.10.21.230 (talk) 23:48, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

 * You are comparing apples and oranges I feel. Zolpidem is pharmacodynamically not the same as zopiclone, zolpidem is more selective for type I benzodiazepine receptors where as zopiclone has little selectivity for benzodiazepine receptors and is almost identical to benzodiazepines, as per WHO reference. So this is probably why the zolpidem article is more favourable as articles reflect the facts in reliable sources. According to reference zopiclone reduces delta waves/slow wave sleep (deep sleep). You disagree with this and feel zopiclone improves sleep architecture, if you have a reference feel free to add it. Your facts at the moment are original research. You are more than welcome to find reliable sources, per WP:MEDRS for anything that you want to add to the article. Wikipedia is not recommended for medical advice so you were not using wikipedia for what it is intended for and at your own risk. It is just an encyclopedia.
 * Eszopiclone is a relatively newly patented drug so the peer reviewed literature on it is not very extensive in comparison to the racemic zopiclone which has been on the market for decades, so is not a fair comparison.-- Literature geek |  T@1k?  19:40, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

I was also surprised at the negative tone of much of the article. While the critical comments are generally well sourced, there will always be media and academic sources voicing criticism of any widely prescribed psychoactive drug, and balance is needed. Much of the article currently reads as if written by someone with an undisclosed personal or commercial agenda. --Ef80 (talk) 09:11, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

The article has a strong bias against zopiclone, cherry picking negative references.

Disambiguation links
I arrived at this page to repair links to the disambiguation page "Addiction." I removed a couple of links later in the article (What are those called? Redundant?). I got confused, though: The first instance of "addictive" is not linked at all. I would simply link it to "Substance use disorder," as I have been doing on similar pages, except that the second use of the word "addictive" is linked to "Drug addiction," which is redirected to "Substance dependence." I am afraid to do anything. Should I move the link to the first use of "addictive"? Should I make that first link to "Substance use disorder" or to "Substance dependence"? Thanks.

Everything Else Is Taken (talk) 15:08, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Contraindications - uncited claim
This whole paragraph is completely unsourced, and seeing as to this article is quite negative as it is I feel it should either be sourced immediately or removed completely. Adding citation needed in any case.

 * Zopiclone is known to, in some case, induce a state of amnesia, which is largely related (and not too dissimilar to 'sleep-walking'). This can extend to sleep-eating, sleep-talking (quite naturally), to dangerously 'sleep driving'. It is therefore usually not used as an anti-anxiety drug (such as Benzodiazepines), as the patient may be liable to make very poor judgment decisions (as they are essentially mentally 'asleep') and attempt dangerous activities. - With absolutely no recollection at all of the events.

Troed (talk) 15:11, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

 * Revisiting this page a year later I made a quick search before intending to remove the paragraph. However, that quick search did turn up a suitable, albeit a bit old, source. Adding. Troed (talk) 10:57, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

I cannot say I have in hand a study which demonstrates this phenomenon but I know that it exists as described above. A U.S. Senator was caught driving while asleep one time and blamed it on the nonbenzos, I believe it's not an uncommon reaction. morsontologica (talk) 19:31, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

added reference not working?
I changed some wording to "It is recommended that zopiclone be taken on a short-term basis, usually a week or less." and added a reliable good quality trustworthy source as a reference, but I have no freaking idea how references work on wikipedia. So I don't think it's working. It shows up as number one in the list, but there's no link to the text I just quoted. 31.109.0.73 (talk) 14:39, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Stereochemistry
This is a racemate, the IUPAC name is correct. Thus, the 3D structure showing a specific configuration is wrong. Best regards, --Jü (talk) 05:51, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

 * Are the two stereoisomers differ in their actions? The first mention in the article on Eszopiclone article ("..is the active dextrorotatory stereoisomer of zopiclone..") makes it sound as though zopiclone doesn't have any activity. I gather from this article as well as the Eszopiclone one that the two seem to be marketed mutually in the U.S. and Europe, with the (maybe) FDA and EMA each denying "significant difference to be new" approval of the "other" isomer.  (I wonder if this has come up in many other instances - the Escitalopram article mentions this issue as being "controversial" in that case) Jimw338 (talk) 21:52, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Dissimilarity to benzos
Throughout this article I see zopiclone equated to benzodiadzepines. However, having tried both I can testify that they produce different kind of effects. Benzodiadzepines produce anxiolytic effects, while zopiclone starts to take your consciousness away, like the way it happens when you are falling in sleep. I think this confusion happens because they both work through same reseptor type, the GABA_A receptor. But this is general inhibitory receptor complex in the brain and is expressed in different ways in different neural circuits. These medicines work trough different subunits of GABA_A receptor complex producing different kind of results. Conflating them together is misleading. 2002:58C1:73FD:0:0:0:58C1:73FD (talk) 13:00, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

I remember the trade journal prior to the release of this drug family. The articles pointed out that the 3 drugs hit fewer brain receptors than benzo-diazepines (2 receptors vs. 5). Current reports by users indicate that the members of this drug family have higher rates, and more significant episodes of retrograde amnesia than any benzo-diazepene. Pharmacologically and empirically, this appears highly unlikely. It is true, however, that in the case of this drug family, inadequate studies were ever undertaken that might provide insight into higher doses. The same lack of "higher" dose study also appears in the case of the melatonin-based drug.

I have had good luck in suggesting to patients taking an hypnotic, to read before sleep (and assiduously use a bookmark), and use the number of pages not remembered as a guideline for amnesia - I suggest this regardless of the hypnotic in use.

The initiating writer of this discussion defines a difference in sensory aspect between zopiclone and benzos: while I believe his assessment to be essentially correct, it is nonetheless necessary to define said effect as not provable. Indeed, every CNS depressant will share similarities, yet still have notable differences.

There are currently "forces" seeking to reduce or eliminate prescriptions for this family of drugs. This is unfortunate, and unsupportable. Failing to monitor any patient's progress with any drug will cause problems. This drug and its relatives are neither candy nor placebos; the prescriber must never eschew responsibility for monitoring ALL prescriptions. Additionally, the failure to test higher doses of these drugs, coupled with the failure to test medium and long-term use of hypnotics is irresponsible. Some sleep disorders can only be treated with long-term administration of hypnotics (political pressure against this fact and practice is unconscionable - yet always political, and never medical).Non-capricious (talk) 06:04, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

Bias : the first half of this Zopiclone article is not written in a detached way
I myself am just encountering Zopiclone and I am pleasantly surprised by it and looking to understand it and to try to objectively compare it with other drugs in order to deduce why it might be working for me. I'm not that sensitive to the way in which Wiki articles are written, and I confine my contributions to the Talk pages, but this article - sophisticated though it appears to be in its use of language and facts - seems to be written with a clear and consistent bias either against this particular drug or its manufacturer or against such medication in general : or it appears to be so up until the section headed ' pharmocology ' which thereafter is written more or less normally. Prior to that the person writing the introductory part contrives to make over two hundred negative or negatively slanted remarks, many of the repeated for emphasis, and talks by analogy about other drugs which they clearly do not like whilst advocating that people should resort to the psychological remedies which they clearly remedy. I actually marked off potentially 231 examples of this negative bias and found nothing to enter in a column for anything positive said about Zopiclone : the idea that there is nothing good to be said about it is preposterous, and whilst I do not know anything much about Zopiclone yet I do know how to recognise bias reporting about this and many other subjects : if psychological interventions are so much more beneficial than psychiatric interventions - as this person advocates - then why haven't they worked in this person's case ? Alright : I can see that their case is a complex one involving obsessively-compulsive-paranoid-delusions-of-the -the-dangers-of-psychiatry-in-order-to-deny-the-authority-of-those-who-might-medicate-them-to-do-so ... but, look, this person need not have deliberately written the useful and truthful stuff out of view : they could have just enter at the top of every Wikipedia page the slogan which they used to teach us at school - " DRUGS !!! - JUST SAY NO !!! " - then leave the objective factual discussions about Napoleon to others ... You are to take this as gentle teasing please, but this was bad behaviour : people need to know the benefits as well as the hazards of Zopiclone - and to be given a reasonable account of the risks, please.DaiSaw (talk) 09:02, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

REM-sleep
The article claims: "Zopiclone reduces the total amount of time spent in REM-sleep as well as delaying its onset." About every other article regarding Zopiclone and REM-sleep states the exact opposite, that Zopiclone does NOT affect the amount of REM-sleep. This 20+ year old claim is at best disputed. Also agree that this article is very biased. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Seasalts (talk • contribs) 14:19, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Error in the first line of the article
"Zopiclone (brand name Zimovane in Europe and Imovane elsewhere)"

This is incorrect. The brand name for Zopiclone IS Imovane in Norway (a european country) and NOT Zimovane.

Deletion regarding schizophrenia
I deleted the statement that this drug may cause schizophrenia. There was one footnote to a citation that was litter more than a comment. No one knows of ANY drug that CAUSES schizophrenia, though some drugs (e.g., marijuana) have been known to exacerbate symptoms in patients with schizophrenia. JohnEnsign — Preceding unsigned comment added by JohnEnsign (talk • contribs) 20:03, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Zopiclone. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20160109073344/http://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/fed_regs/rules/2005/fr0404.htm to http://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/fed_regs/rules/2005/fr0404.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 16:35, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Glaring absence
"Zopiclone was developed and first introduced in 1986 by Rhône-Poulenc S.A., now part of Sanofi-Aventis, the main worldwide manufacturer." - all very well and good, but why is it called "zopiclone"? —  Scott  •  talk  23:05, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

This is a warzone
I has been a while since I bumped into most of the psychopharmacology articles, here. But now that I did, this article on zopiclone suddenly reads like a goddamn ideological warzone. I haven't even gotten to the rest in its link clowd, say the rest of the Z-drugs, or the proper bentzodiazepine series, or whatever else we use to sedate people. But I fear similar mayhem would be expected there as well.

I don't think any kind of procedural intervention can ever hope to remedy this kind of a silent, motivated editing...influence. However a community project, designed to include editorship and decisively to exclude primary expertise, might just do the trick.

Anybody game? Over a wider swath of pages of course, and not just this. Starting with the non-bentzos, and then progressively including everything from bentodiazepines to barbiturates to even ethyl alcohol, as they pertain to GABA-ergic sedation as a class. I believe a focused, dedicated project like that could really help bring about some order into many related articles at the same time. This one included. Decoy (talk) 05:35, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Vandalism?
Currently the second paragraph has sentences out of context and make no sense: 'And zopiclone is also made of herbs' acid. These can include a range of symptoms similar to those of benzodiazepine withdrawal. Although withdrawal from therapeutic doses of zopiclone and its isomers (i.e. eszopiclone) They use the herbs oil to make the zopiclone. Then do not typically present with convulsions' Andrew ranfurly (talk) 02:36, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you for pointing out the vandalism. Don't be afraid to be WP:BOLD and fix mistakes like this yourself! It looks like the problematic edits . ― Bio chemistry 🙴 ❤   20:30, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

No section about severe withdrawal?
Zopiclone is in the Ashton benozodiazepin withdrawal manual, since withdrawal is as devastating as with actual benzodiazepines. This MUST be mentioned clearly in this article. GABA-drug dependency is one of the big remaining hell's we still have in our culture. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:8109:8680:3241:350E:EE7C:1F33:D9D (talk) 19:26, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Scientific terminology
I've edited this to clear up some small scientific inaccuracies and imprecisions. The term "benzodiazepine receptor", although still in occasional use, should be retired. It's a historical term to represent the fact it was known benzodiazepines must bind to something, but the GABA-A receptor was not identified until about 20 years later. Also, there's some inaccurate references to alpha1/2/etc "sites". These are component subunits of the receptor (GABA-A receptors have five subunits, 2 alpha, 2 beta, one other; there are multiple variations of each type of subunit). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Agema (talk • contribs) 23:54, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Misleading statement about partial tolerance in Contraindications section
The article, citing a source (https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00213-005-0082-8), claims that

"Long-term users of hypnotic drugs for sleep disorders develop only partial tolerance to adverse effects on driving, with users of hypnotic drugs even after one year of use still showing an increased motor vehicle accident rate"

The second part of the statement is however misleading. Reading the primary source (https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/417260) reveals that the findings of the one year study are for long half-life benzodiazepines, while short half-life benzos did not show an increased risk. Generalizing to all hypnotic drugs is not accurate.

I would suggest adding/updating the reference to the primary source and updating the statement to be more specific.

Guillaume.web (talk) 16:24, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Zopiclone


text:
User:Saxifrage

Hi there.

I am a member of the Harmonious Editing Club and an administrator.

My use of the tools which the community has entrusted to me can and should be reviewed:
 * Blocks I've given
 * Pages I've deleted
 * Pages I've protected

A Handy Guide to My Biases
I hope that this will be useful to my fellow editors when considering my edits, particularly for those editors who have opposing views to my own. Calling me on biases that show in my edits (if they don't follow the NPOV guidelines) is helpful and appreciated, especially when done diplomatically and with sound arguments laying out what view of reality I'm missing. (Note that this isn't a call for me to adopt your bias whole-cloth, just to expand my awareness of other ways of seeing the world that I can integrate into my own and to help me keep my bias in check.)

I've split this into two sections: things that, due to my place in the world, have become "normal" to my mind, and things that are deliberately adopted as part of my point of view and/or belief system. If I don't think it's relevant to my endeavours at Wikipedia, I won't include it. However, these lists will expand as what meets that criterion changes.

Note that this section is not an invitation to make ad-hominem attacks on my edits and arguments. Everyone has bias, and I am no exception. By disclosing the bias I am aware of, I hope, among other things, to defuse that kind of ad-hominem attack as well as to prevent biases I don't hold from being ascribed to me.

Normalised parts of me
By no choice of my own, these are things that filter how I see the world:
 * male gender
 * Western world
 * capitalism
 * Canada
 * feminism
 * public and University education

Adopted biases
I am, by choice...
 * socialist
 * areligious/secular
 * non-monogamous
 * mildly anti-capitalist
 * mildly anti-communist
 * pacifist
 * anti-war
 * sex-positive

Editorial notes

 * Their is a perfectly good ungendered singular.
 * IPA is our dictionary key and spelling guide standard, but "rhymes with" and "proNUN" alongside the IPA increases utility with minimal clutter.

Habitual typos
I make a few inexplicable typos consistently, and they're ones that consistently fly under my radar and frustrate me to no end. If you find me writing and for an, not for no, or getting -ed and -es switched, please correct me (even in my Talk page comments). If you're not sure what I meant because it's not obvious whether it's a typo or not, drop me a note at my Talk page and I'll correct it. As for articles... I apologise profusely to any editors that have to clean up after me in advance. I've gotten to the point that I can only be amused and bemused by this, as it resists every attempt I make at noticing it when I do it.

I suspect that how inflectional morphemes and prepositions are processed by the brain contributes to this, since they're all ones that have been found to be processed at a very basic cognitive level.

Stubs I've started

 * VanDusen Botanical Garden
 * Flower child
 * Secretariat of the European Parliament
 * Canadian Intellectual Property Office
 * Hennin
 * MacTeX
 * xindy

Articles I've written or translated

 * Burg Maus (translated)
 * Claude Vermette (wrote)
 * Sainte-Adèle, Quebec (wrote)
 * Warzone (game) (rewrote)

One-time tasks
-
 * Links cleanup
 * Short projects

 * Present link at Talk:Corporate identity, linking to argument at User talk:Shauny000
 * Fix links at The Faction War
 * Formatting of Template:Sailing dinghies and skiffs and Template:Keelboats worldwide

 * Middling projects

 * Write essay for conflict-of-interest writers (spammers, company employees, etc) on how Wikipedia works
 * Deal with Perchance it is not dead but sleepeth being used as a template
 * Sir Gregory Page-Turner reads like a copyvio: investigate

 * Large projects

 * Improve Fred Penner
 * Turn the MUCK redirect into a proper article. See TinyMUCK etc.
 * Turn collectible miniature game redirect into a proper article or add a section to miniature figure.
 * Fix up Tarkin to remove the and  tags
 * Overhaul Multimedia Container Format for style, voice, and references
 * Start /Collaborative roleplaying and move into article space
 * Write The Big Model and get attention for its improvement at the RPG wikiproject.
 * Do major cleanup of Virtual water - requires significant research
 * Write article about Charles Stuart, the English spy (ref: Private&Secret)

Ongoing tasks

 * Category:Wikipedia articles with nonstandard pronunciation

title: User:Saxifrage