Hinata’s strike pierced through Rimuru’s body. However, Rimuru had long predicted this move, letting his power go out of control and dealing with this using crude measures. Even I was quite impressed by this kind of ruthless technique.
“Rimuru-sama g-got stabbed! Huh, what is that shape?”
Ifrit looked extremely frightened.
This was also unavoidable.
What appeared there was Rimuru’s form after transforming into a terrible monster.
The traits of the monsters he had consumed emerged on the surface, appearing incredibly evil.
And what was more frightening -- was that this was the effects of 『Gluttony』 unleashed.
Everything the eye could see could virtually all be swallowed up, and not long afterwards, the skill could grow to even swallow up something the size of an entire planet… he might very well become such a terrifying monster.
Hinata seemed to also be aware of this.
“… I must destroy you completely, or else this world will be plunged into crisis.”
I checked the translation and I suspected that if the translation is not based on the original text you provided. The translation only translated the "[he might very well] become such a terrifying monster. Hinata seemed to also be aware of this. '… I must destroy you completely, or else this world will be plunged into crisis.' " (Chinese: 为这么恐怖的怪物。日向似乎也察觉到了这一点。 「……我必须要完全消灭你，不然世界将会陷入危机。」) And maybe the original text before the methioned text is needed in order to confirm.
I briefly checked it. The original descpition is said that the monster will become the size which could swallow the planet. (But due to the Chinese language, it is unclear that its ability is swallowing a planet or more than one planet)
Hey, I'm Gyro of the wiki's auditing team. I saw you were a contributor towards the verse '100% Orange Juice. We've found several issues with the verse, and were wondering if you could help rectify them.
The verse has no calcs, no sources and not much context backing up statements like "Recreated the Orange Juice universe and The Creator", "Should be comparable to the fodder of the verse, being able to break steel balls" and giving Massively FTL+ for "travel between universes". Some ratings are quite obviously false (Suguri is rated 5-A for smashing three planets, where there's no proof this is beyond 3x baseline 5-B, and is given Speed of Light reactions for dodging lasers that aren't proven to follow our light standards. Subsonic+ rating has no justification whatsoever). There are also some powers and abilities that seem to be missing (Suguri has items that boost speed, utilise electricity and fire energy beams, but her abilities do not reflect this).
The verse is under threat of being deleted for its profiles being very unreliable, so if you can help resolve these issues that would be much appreciated.
The mythology profiles on VBW are all unreliable garbage without exception. To fix this, we need:
1. Citations for every supposed feat, description, or ability in mythology, from reputable sources on ancient or modern mythologies (primary sources, of course, being the best). If we're quoting primary mythological texts (such as the Iliad) directly, then the specific translator of the text should be noted as well. The citations should obviously have links.
2. Detailed explanations for the cosmology of each mythology. I don't want to have to hear about 4-B Norns or the High 1-B Hindu-Buddhist multiverse without a proper explanation as to why.
3. The separation of "normal" and "abnormal" conceptions of various mythological figures into multiple keys (e.g. no conflating Hellenistic Dionysus with Orphic Dionysus and Dionysiaca Dionysus, as the character profile does)
4. A standard of dealing with the various names, titles, and epithets of mythological figures. In ancient cultures, such names, titles, and epithets were extremely important theologically speaking.
5. A standard of dealing with various "high-concept" descriptions of deities (I.e. descriptions of them being "exalted beyond the heavens" or "infinite and eternal" or "spaceless and timeless"). Should we take them at face-value (as the ancient cultures most likely did, for the most part), or should we consider them as mostly hyperbole, or should be try to "contextualize" them in a modern philosophical context?
6. A standard of dealing with ancient theologies, especially for mythologies without a specific "canon" (like classical mythology). I don't understand why we should have to consider Amaterasu as equal to Amenominakanushi based on an unnamed and unsourced old Japanese religious text that doesn't even seem to exist.