Talk:g-force
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the G-force article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5Auto-archiving period: 28 days  |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
.jpg){kind=small}
 | This article has been viewed enough times in a single year to make it into the Top 50 Report annual list. This happened in 2013, when it received 17,177,762 views. |
| This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report 7 times. The weeks in which this happened: |
Roller coasters edit
I wondered about the paragraph on amusement rides, where it is said that they usually don't pull over 3 g with some listed exceptions. However, according to "rcdb.com" and other coaster-related sources, almost every looping coaster on the world pulls about 4-5 g on entering the loop (e.g. the Vekoma Boomerang which is found in many parks around the world is said to pull 5.2 g on its first inversion).—Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.203.254.65 (talk • contribs)
Problem edit
The title of the article "g-force" starts with small letter. JelloMello24 (talk) 20:14, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
Motorsports in the "typical examples" section. edit
We don't need formula 1 referenced 4 times, the only motorsports refs should be breaking G-force, and Kenny Braeck's crash. The Verstappen/Hamilton incident is clearly inflammatory if you're a fan of the sport, and the Grosjean example is superfluous. Perhaps the V8 example is 'good enough', but I stand by removing the two formula one crash references. Ruby.Boulton (talk) 02:51, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
Article does not proceed logically edit
In many places, this article jumps around from concept to concept, perhaps following the train of associations in the mind of a writer. This has led to inconsistent terminology, inconsistent logic, and difficult reading.
The slight helpfulness of knowing which topics are related in an author's mind doesn't seem worth it in this case. TooManyFingers (talk) 19:23, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
This article needs improvement edit
Should that banner thing at the top of the page that says "This article doesn't meet the standards for Wikipedia" or whatever be at the top? Theres 2 sections without any citations, and multiple needed citations Smirkjuice (talk) 23:06, 31 May 2024 (UTC)