• This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.

    For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here.
  • We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.

    Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.

    Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page.
  • Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.

Minor Lifting Strength Article Suggestion

Status
Not open for further replies.

Ryukama

Joke Battles
Bureaucrat
Administrator
Retired VSB Bureaucrat
11,531
8,016
Hello. I just had a minor suggestion for our Lifting Strength page. Adding "tons" to the chart as well. I believe this will make the page much easier to grasp and understand. Especially for newer readers. The fact is that no one evaluates higher end lifting feats in kilograms or newtons. No one says "Goku can lifted 3.62874e4 kilograms during the Buu Saga." Or "Superman lifted 1.81436948e23 kilograms." Or "Ultron's strength in the Marvel Guidebook is in the 9.07185e4 kilogram range." The entire reason why the measurement tons gets used in real life is to account for extreme weights. Trucks and most heavy machinery aren't classified in kilograms they're classified in tons.

It won't at all be some sort of hard edit to implement. It's just a simple conversion using what we already have. It would only take a few minutes max. Class G onward perhaps needs scientific notation, but the rest of the categories can just be simply written out as "1.1 tons," "55.5 tons" and so on.

This also would not make an excessive number of sections for the table. So far we only have 3 sections (Kilogram, Newton and Explanation). The Speed chart has 5 separate sections and it's just fine.

As for whether we'd use US tons or metric tons, either is fine. I'm more used to the US ton personally and of course that's what media such as Marvel/DC comics more frequently use, but metric ton also works if we want to use just the metric system. Regardless the US ton and the metric ton only differ by 1.6%. So whichever we use wouldn't make that huge of a difference.

Overall I just think this would be a nice edition to make the article more comprehensive. Of course it's not absolutely a necessary make or break for the page. It's simply a suggestion I had. Thank you.
 
I always thought it would have been good, but at the same time I believed it was up on me to be less ignorant about those numbers.
 
As I said in discord, I was planning to make this addition months ago, around september, albeit I didn't because Wokistan said it was unnecessary.

But I'm still up for the revision.
 
I agree with this yes. I will say right now I am heavily biased towards metric tons (mostly cause that's what we're already using, i.e. the metric system).
 
I'm fine with this, also I'm prolly also fine with the usage of both metric tons and US tons. And if possible, maybe even the British tons (2240 lbs). But I guess metric tons sounds a lot better.

Someone should prolly ask DT to carry it out, he did a similar revision for Speed as well.
 
I'm fine with this, also I'm prolly also fine with the usage of both metric tons and US tons. And if possible, maybe even the British tons (2240 lbs). But I guess metric tons sounds a lot better.

Someone should prolly ask DT to carry it out, he did a similar revision for Speed as well.
I don't think we need any one specific user to carry it out, it's fairly simple. That being said, it's been thoroughly accepted, soooo, who is going to apply it?
 
I don't think we need any one specific user to carry it out, it's fairly simple. That being said, it's been thoroughly accepted, soooo, who is going to apply it?
Not me, that's for sure, I don't know jack about how to edit tables.
 
Thank you for helping out.

Should we close this thread then?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top