Talk:2329: Universal Rating Scale - Revision history

172.70.35.70 at 14:11, 19 August 2021

2021-08-19T14:11:59Z

172.69.50.78: -

2020-07-21T00:38:30Z

172.68.182.56 at 08:18, 15 July 2020

2020-07-15T08:18:06Z

141.101.104.127: douce point

2020-07-13T13:47:52Z

douce point

These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For at 04:07, 12 July 2020

2020-07-12T04:07:42Z

108.162.216.112 at 19:05, 11 July 2020

2020-07-11T19:05:29Z

162.158.79.113 at 01:16, 9 July 2020

2020-07-09T01:16:34Z

172.69.68.139: Possible alternative explanation for why 9 was omitted

2020-07-08T18:25:33Z

Possible alternative explanation for why 9 was omitted

162.158.78.10: corrected my numbers

2020-07-08T13:12:19Z

corrected my numbers

172.69.63.169 at 13:05, 8 July 2020

2020-07-08T13:05:21Z

@@ Line 15: / Line 15: @@
 I think the faces are supposed to correspond to a face-based pain scale, which is supported by the fact that they occur at similar places to the pain scale and that the frowny face looks more like the frowny face from one of these charts than any traditional sad face emoji. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.250.44|172.69.250.44]] 02:45, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
-This listed F as standing for Fine under the coin grading scale. However, the coin grading scale runs from 0-70, and ordered Poor (P, or About Good, AG, depending on personal preference), Good (G), Very Good (VG), Fine (F), Very Fine (VF), Etremely Fine (XF),  About Uncirculated (AU), and Uncirculated (UNC or MS, for Mint State, depending on personal preference). Because Fine is better than Good and Very Good on the coin grading scale, but F is worse than G and VG on Randall's Universal Rating Scale, F probably refers to the letter grade for schoolwork, rather than the coin grade of Fine, so I removed F from the coin grade section. The G might also stand for a movie rating, but whether it is a movie rating or a coin grade, it's position would remain the same, so it's a moot point which it is. [[User:NErDysprosium|NErDysprosium]] ([[User talk:NErDysprosium|talk]]) 05:48, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
+This listed F
 I know some video games and fantasy stories contain things that have a letter rating, typically starting a few letters into the alphabet and increasing as it gets closer to A, often with an S above that, but sometimes another rating above S labeled "EX" for "extra".  These scales sometimes have additional ratings with a + or - attached, or increasing by repeating the letter 2 or 3 times in a row before going up to the next letter.  Thus the same system might have both "AAA" and "S", but normally unlike this chart the S would be higher.  In some cases it might end up topping out with something like "SSS+".  This sort of thing is particularly common in stories originating in Japan which involve some sort of other world that contain some sort of features similar to a video game with some sort of "Adventurer's Guild" which would often have such a system.  In particular there are quite a lot of Japanese novels that are like this, many of which containing strange or unique twists on otherwise common formulaic settings.  Some of these both have official English translations or were later adapted into manga or anime, or oddly enough in quite a few cases were a self published thing posted online as a hobbyist before later being picked up by a publisher and being somewhat changed and re-written as a proper book.  Many also have people making and posting online fan translations of them.--[[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.35|162.158.74.35]] 06:40, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
@@ Line 54: / Line 55: @@
 You know, the F grade oughta fit in between 5 and 6. At least on the American scale, any score below 60% is considered an F. A 'D' would be between 6 and 7, 'C' between 7 and 8, 'B' between 8 and 9, and an 'A' between 9 and 10.[[Special:Contributions/172.69.50.78|172.69.50.78]] 00:38, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:38, 21 July 2020
Line 52:		Line 52:

	I thought "tall" being just below 2 suggested that people who are close to 2m in height are considered tall people.		I thought "tall" being just below 2 suggested that people who are close to 2m in height are considered tall people.
		+
		+	You know, the F grade oughta fit in between 5 and 6. At least on the American scale, any score below 60% is considered an F. A 'D' would be between 6 and 7, 'C' between 7 and 8, 'B' between 8 and 9, and an 'A' between 9 and 10.[[Special:Contributions/172.69.50.78\|172.69.50.78]] 00:38, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:18, 15 July 2020
Line 49:		Line 49:

	It seems cut off at the end.. Missing "Douce Point!".		It seems cut off at the end.. Missing "Douce Point!".
		+
		+
		+	I thought "tall" being just below 2 suggested that people who are close to 2m in height are considered tall people.

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:47, 13 July 2020
Line 47:		Line 47:

	Am I the only one who would like to see "Safe", "Neutralized", "Esoteric", "Thaumiel", "Euclid", and "Keter", added to this scale?		Am I the only one who would like to see "Safe", "Neutralized", "Esoteric", "Thaumiel", "Euclid", and "Keter", added to this scale?
		+
		+	It seems cut off at the end.. Missing "Douce Point!".

@@ Line 4: / Line 4: @@
 : I think the most likely candidate from {{w|UNC|w:UNC}} is the numismatic code for an {{w|uncirculated coin}}. —[[User:Scs|Scs]] ([[User talk:Scs|talk]]) 00:49, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
 : Unified National Coarse is the name of a scale (not a rating on it) for thread sizes (for screws, nuts, bolts, etc.)[[Special:Contributions/172.69.68.187|172.69.68.187]] 02:12, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
 I don’t think A/AA/AAA are battery sizes, but rather [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Credit_rating credit rating]. That is also consistent with their positions in the upper half of the scale.--[[Special:Contributions/172.69.235.142|172.69.235.142]] 00:37, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:05, 11 July 2020
Line 43:		Line 43:

	I thought that 9 was omitted because Windows skipped version 9 when doing their version releases (mostly due to the fact that there was Windows 95 and Windows 98 which began with 9).		I thought that 9 was omitted because Windows skipped version 9 when doing their version releases (mostly due to the fact that there was Windows 95 and Windows 98 which began with 9).
		+	: I thought the reason was that Windows 8 was widely disliked, so they wanted to distance the new version from it.--[[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.112\|108.162.216.112]] 19:05, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

	Am I the only one who would like to see "Safe", "Neutralized", "Esoteric", "Thaumiel", "Euclid", and "Keter", added to this scale?		Am I the only one who would like to see "Safe", "Neutralized", "Esoteric", "Thaumiel", "Euclid", and "Keter", added to this scale?

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:16, 9 July 2020
Line 43:		Line 43:

	I thought that 9 was omitted because Windows skipped version 9 when doing their version releases (mostly due to the fact that there was Windows 95 and Windows 98 which began with 9).		I thought that 9 was omitted because Windows skipped version 9 when doing their version releases (mostly due to the fact that there was Windows 95 and Windows 98 which began with 9).
		+
		+	Am I the only one who would like to see "Safe", "Neutralized", "Esoteric", "Thaumiel", "Euclid", and "Keter", added to this scale?

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:25, 8 July 2020
Line 41:		Line 41:

	I thought that the F was a reference to "pay respects", indicating embarrassing failure		I thought that the F was a reference to "pay respects", indicating embarrassing failure
		+
		+	I thought that 9 was omitted because Windows skipped version 9 when doing their version releases (mostly due to the fact that there was Windows 95 and Windows 98 which began with 9).

@@ Line 36: / Line 36: @@
 : That's how in some school courses they "grade on a curve" where if no one can get a perfect score on a test, they change the score so the highest existing score is changed to 100, and all the other people who took the test also have the same amount added to their score (or at least that's the way I'm most familiar with, it might be possible to do so with a somewhat different method).  Thus they can have an unreasonably difficult test without causing abnormally low scores that will cause tons of students to get failing grades.--[[Special:Contributions/162.158.75.134|162.158.75.134]] 17:25, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
-:The "curve" technically refers to a bell curve; that is adjusting the letter grades by organizing the students into bins based on that distribution (the ~64% nearest the average grade get a C, then the 14% just above that get a B and the top 2% get an A, and the same pattern going down for D and F). However most instructors who say they "grade on a curve" don't do that since grades rarely fit that curve, and this often unfairly punishes students who performed well but weren't the top score. EG if the scores are all between 90% and 100% correct then the student(s) who got 90% correct will receive an F. Most of my experience with "grading on a curve" has been that the instructor sets the highest score achieved to represent 100%, but I have also had professors who adjust the grading bands so most students get a B or better. The latter method avoids forcing a failing mark on students who just happened to get the lowest score, but unlike adjusting the 100% level down it provides no benefit to someone who did significantly worse than their peers.[[Special:Contributions/172.69.63.169|172.69.63.169]] 13:05, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
+:The "curve" technically refers to a bell curve; that is adjusting the letter grades by organizing the students into bins based on that distribution (the ~68% of students nearest the average grade get a C, then the 14% just above that get a B and the top 2% get an A, and the same pattern going down for D and F). However most instructors who say they "grade on a curve" don't do that since grades rarely fit that curve, and this often unfairly punishes students who performed well but weren't the top score. EG if the scores are all between 90% and 100% correct then the student(s) who got 90% correct will receive an F. Most of my experience with "grading on a curve" has been that the instructor sets the highest score achieved to represent 100%, but I have also had professors who adjust the grading bands so most students get a B or better. The latter method avoids forcing a failing mark on students who just happened to get the lowest score, but unlike adjusting the 100% level down it provides no benefit to someone who did significantly worse than their peers.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.78.10|162.158.78.10]] 13:12, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
 I rate this comic perfect 5/7. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.69.159|141.101.69.159]] 19:08, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
 I thought that the F was a reference to "pay respects", indicating embarrassing failure