Talk:Esolang Quality Rating System

Issues

I don't think this system is a great idea considering the vagueness of "quality" and the insane difficulty that comes with defining which features are good and which are bad. Furthermore I believe purely original ideas may seem like a good way to measure quality, but in reality most of the greatest work comes from taking an already good idea and making it better. I feel like we should have a bunch of different scores that have different biasies, as a single score is implying that this is objectively correct and 100% accurate, when it is essentially impossible to objectively define what is good as we all have our own preferences. --Nurdle (talk)

Computational Class points revamp

I see language losing points for not being Turing Complete as a bad thing: an esolang can be well thought through and based on an interesting idea while not being Turing Complete. I propose changing this criterion to have these three tiers, from lowest to highest: unknown, conjectured and proven. "Proven" tier could also include languages which computational class is proven uncomputable, or it could be its own tier in which case I would argue it should go above "proven". Olus2000 (talk) 19:58, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

I changed the pointing system for Computational Class, I think it's a lot fairer. --Nurdle (talk) 15:03, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I think having an unknown computational class could be either a bad sign or a very good sign. If the computational class is unknown because nobody's bothered to work it out, that's a sign that the esolang probably isn't interesting. If the computational class is unknown despite serious attempts to work it out, that probably means that the language a) is interesting and b) is probably somewhat original (otherwise the class would likely be known already), unless it's just a simple derivative of an esolang with an unknown computational class. --ais523 12:48, 12 November 2025 (UTC)

Possible Name Change

I am thinking this could use a name change, "Esolang Quality Rating System" is a little clunky in my opinion. I think we should try to move more towards this system being used to judge wikipages rather than esolangs. Here's a list of names that I think work better than "Esolang Quality Rating System":

• Esolangs Wikipage Rating System
• EsoWiki Rating System
• EsoWiki Page Score

--Nurdle (talk) 15:09, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

No. There's multiple things on this list which a bunch of esolangs dont have, but are still good esolangs. I personally think there is not point in even trying to rate esolangs. An example of esolangs that(didnt) have one of the things here, but are still good, is Malbolge. Malbolge had no examples at its point in creation. this system is practically useless, and should defenitily not bee used to rate pages. --Yayimhere2(school) (talk) 09:26, 12 November 2025 (UTC)