Talk:Kilogram-force

This  level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Physics Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Engineering Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Engineering, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of engineering on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EngineeringWikipedia:WikiProject EngineeringTemplate:WikiProject EngineeringEngineering articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Nobody uses kilopund in the metric system! Force is all ways newton in the metric system. It does no matter if "Gravitational", "Engineering" or "Absolute". It's may not easy to understand for Americans and Britannia's... :-) But it is the true!

The Newton is taught right from the beginning of Secondry school in Britain. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.130.194.100 (talk) 20:29, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

both of the references define the kilogram as a mass.

                                   --Dorminton (talk) 05:58, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kilogram-force. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040615185954/http://www1.bipm.org/en/si/si_brochure/chapter2/2-2/2-2-2.html to http://www1.bipm.org/en/si/si_brochure/chapter2/2-2/2-2-2.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:03, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]