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)
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