Talk:Superhuman strength Information & Talk:Superhuman strength Links at HealthHaven.com

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Superhuman strength article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (`~~~~`). New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers.	Be polite Assume good faith Avoid personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

WikiProject Comics

(Rated Start-Class, Low-importance)

Comics portal

This article is in the scope of WikiProject Comics, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to comics on Wikipedia. Get involved! Help with current tasks, visit the notice board, edit the attached article or discuss it at the project talk page.

Start

This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article was nominated for deletion on 19 August 2007. The result of the discussion was no consensus, defaulting to keep but rewrite and improve.

[edit] Explain me

If the super power is strength, i dont understand why slam tazmanian(from Loonatics Unleashed) and sanson(from the biblia) isnt are named here. please explain me.greetings

--Lizzie Rivera 23:21, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Because we can't name everyone that is super strong. Joeking16 (talk) 10:41, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] More details

Part of superhuman strength that has been touched on in this article, is the latent invulnerability. In other words, all characters, even in mythology, have some degree of invulnerability, otherwise they would be crushed by their own strength. Imagine if hulk punched a wall and broke his hand with the wall. The two powers are usually combined to some degree, at lesat to the point that the character can actually use their strength without hurting themselves. Even spider-man has some invulnerability to the point that he doesn't get bruises, and breaks his bone when he lifts a car. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Acecool79 (talk • contribs)

All that goes very briefly and summarised in the "feats" section as a noted observation. Do not over expand, which would reach into original research territory.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 19:32, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

I see what you mean, without a degree of body toughening someone with super strength when they tense their muscles they could crush their own bones. Especially people like the Hulk and Spiderman, Spiderman is a class 30 (30 tonnes he can lift in recent record) and the Hulk has unlimited strength so they will need it.

[edit] Samson Reference

I removed the reference to Samson under the section devoted to mythological characters. Samson has a prominent place in the Christian faith, so there are numerous people who believe him to have really existed. I added Thor to the list since he and Hercules are characters that are accepted to have been myths, due in part to them being associated with dead religions. Odin's Beard 23:42, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

How do some people believing bullshit mean that somehow it must!!!11!11one be true? The bible is a fictional work, and there is absolutely no doubt about it. You can only believe this crap if you have a serious case of schizophrenia. — 94.220.255.59 (talk) 18:32, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Mythology doesn't necessarily mean that something is untrue; it's more an indicator of cultural signifigance. For instance, see the Wikipedia article on Christian mythology.

Noclevername 05:14, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Besides, Thor and Hercules are probably still worshipped by some people. That being the case, why are they under the "In fiction" section? It seems terribly biased, and offensive to people of religious beliefs (besides, there may be some historical basis for people like Samson). I'm putting it in its own section. RobbieG 15:20, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Problems with Superhuman strength

Would it be appropriate to note in this article some problems with superhuman strength, especially at the higher levels? For example, I can recall some discussions on whether Superman could really lift, say, a supertanker, without causing it to collapse around his hands. This in turn was explained away with a sort of telekinetic field that allowed his strength as I recall. FrozenPurpleCube 04:57, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea to me. The article needs expansion beyond "list of notable examples of characters who possess superhuman strengh".~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 14:24, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

I think that it is something that should be considered, but i think that the biggest problem would be balance. Numerous times when i picked someone or something up and ended up dropping it because i couldn't balance it properly and then lifted a far heavier object with ease because i could balance it. Also i think someone should make a section where we can tell people our theories of acheiving supehuman strenght amongst other attributes:)

[edit] Worried about this article

I have this terrible fear it's going to degenerate with everyone who happens across it adding everyone they can think of with superhuman strength. The category already exists. Maybe someone should think of creating List of fictional characters who possess superhuman strength.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 10:54, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

I'd say remove the Superman parodies. That alone should cut it down. I'm taking out a few minor characters.

Noclevername 05:16, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mythology

Since the concept originated in mythology, isn't that far more relevant than fiction? RobbieG 15:05, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

In a word, no. It's a concept primarily belonging to contemporary fiction. If a vote has to be taken and mythology has to be kept, it would not belong separately from the fiction lists. What would be good, would be a cited PROSE section about uses of superhuman strength in mythology. That would be excellent.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 16:39, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

I might do that later or maybe someone else will; right now I'm a little busy, so that may have to wait. Could you please clarify, though - are you calling religion fictional? I think a number of people could get very offended by that implication. RobbieG 18:44, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm not saying they're definitely anything, but I would say the way they're presented is very different - and much older than - contemporary fiction, and therefore only belong with context affixing their relevance to the topic. For example, it would start "the concept of strength beyond human limits can be found in early beliefs of..." and going on to describe "demi-God Hercules bla bla bla" and "Biblical figure Samson used his strength to... and lost it when...". We should use {{bibleref}} too, though.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 18:51, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Adrenaline

When outside of a certain Bill Bixby show did adrenalized strength become classed as "superhuman"? If humans can do it, it's not super, it's human strength. --Noclevername (talk) 01:28, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

I agree. If a human can do it, it should be deemed human strength. --DavidD4scnrt (talk) 08:18, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Superhuman & Inhuman strength

Hi everyone, can Inhuman strength be a redirect to the article Superhuman strength? I didn't feel the difference, and tried to google for it. There is a comment by Ron Marz, where "superhuman & inhuman strength" were simply described as "stronger than human". Can this source be a good cause to create a redirect? Because I often see this expression (inhuman strength) in the articles.--91.78.97.10 (talk) 17:51, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

I don't see why not ;) Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 00:58, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Definition

The article currently describes superhuman strength as follows "It is the ability for any human to be stronger than normally possible given their proportions.", isn't superhuman strength physical strength which exceeds human capabilities? Superman is frequently described as having superhuman strength, however, as a non-human character, he cannot meet the article's current definition of superhuman strength. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 01:42, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Contents