Talk:List of unusual units of measurement
 | This article was nominated for deletion on March 25, 2007. The result of the discussion was keep. |
 | This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
.jpg){kind=small}
 | Sections describing units that are believed not to fulfill Wikipedia criteria for notability can be found in Talk:List of unusual units of measurement/Candidates. Only if sufficient documentation and references can be found of actual usage and notability, can they be moved into the main article. |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 365 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 2 sections are present. |
"Banana for scale"
[edit]Would it be worth adding "banana" as an unusual unit of measurement for length/distance? The concept of "banana for scale" is something that has become quite common in popular culture as a jokey, "desperate" measure of length and thus is possibly worth mentioning, at least briefly, as it is a much smaller-scale version of the "American football field" as a relative sense of measurement.
Sources: https://www.dailydot.com/unclick/banana-for-scale-meme-history/ https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/banana-for-scale 83.146.12.0 (talk) 12:55, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
- I think the jokeyness counts against including it. More importantly, though, this list is for units of measurement, not objects for scale. The difference is this: it's common to include a banana in an image for scale. It is not so common to say that an object is 5 bananas wide. The latter is a unit of measurement, the former is not. In contrast, you do see someone describe something as the length of 5 football fields.--Srleffler (talk) 17:42, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
- PS. This has come up before.--Srleffler (talk) 17:46, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
Smoot
[edit]I was surprised to see the smoot added, as I had assumed it was always here! It was moved 7 November 2006 to List of humorous units of measurement#Smoot, where it remains – with more detail. —Tamfang (talk) 03:56, 23 December 2023 (UTC)
Other measurements
[edit]Is there a criteria for what should go into this article? The potential for this category is near endless, but I'm thinking of older measurements no longer commonly used, like furlong, league, fathom, surveyors chain (66 feet), rod, rood, perch, barley corns, etc. Supposedly there's a definition of "jiffy". Nerfer (talk) 19:57, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
- The criteria are more limited than you might think. Obsolete units belong at List of obsolete units of measurement. Humorous units belong at List of humorous units of measurement. This list is for serious units that are actually still used to measure things, but which are in one way or another unusual. Jiffy is on the list. None of the others you mention fit the criteria.--Srleffler (talk) 05:23, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- Under Fathom#Water depth I read : Most modern nautical charts indicate depth in metres. However, the U.S. Hydrographic Office uses feet and fathoms (with a reference over there). Doesn't that make the fathom a "serious unit actually still used to measure things but in one way or another unusual" ? (Unusual, in this case, in that it is now obsolete everywhere except on U.S. nautical charts, where it is still used to measure depths, as it used to be on the Admiralty charts I used, oh, maybe 50 years ago, when sailing a Glénans cutter between North Brittany and the Channel Islands ["Heights in feet, depths in fathoms and feet"]). (Of course the French charts were in metres, but we also had British large-scale charts for the islands.) — Tonymec (talk) 03:19, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- This page defines an unusual unit of measurement as a "unit of measurement that does not form part of a coherent system of measurement". The fathom is part of the imperial and the U.S. customary systems, and therefore is not unusual, as that term is defined here.--Srleffler (talk) 05:31, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hm. Well, a "hand" is defined here as 4 inches, or one-third of a foot. Doesn't that make it part of the same coherent measurement system ? — Tonymec (talk) 05:42, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hand (unit) doesn't say that the hand is part of the imperial or US customary system of units. Fathom does.--Srleffler (talk) 07:55, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hm. Well, a "hand" is defined here as 4 inches, or one-third of a foot. Doesn't that make it part of the same coherent measurement system ? — Tonymec (talk) 05:42, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- This page defines an unusual unit of measurement as a "unit of measurement that does not form part of a coherent system of measurement". The fathom is part of the imperial and the U.S. customary systems, and therefore is not unusual, as that term is defined here.--Srleffler (talk) 05:31, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- Under Fathom#Water depth I read : Most modern nautical charts indicate depth in metres. However, the U.S. Hydrographic Office uses feet and fathoms (with a reference over there). Doesn't that make the fathom a "serious unit actually still used to measure things but in one way or another unusual" ? (Unusual, in this case, in that it is now obsolete everywhere except on U.S. nautical charts, where it is still used to measure depths, as it used to be on the Admiralty charts I used, oh, maybe 50 years ago, when sailing a Glénans cutter between North Brittany and the Channel Islands ["Heights in feet, depths in fathoms and feet"]). (Of course the French charts were in metres, but we also had British large-scale charts for the islands.) — Tonymec (talk) 03:19, 10 February 2024 (UTC)