What does WR mean?
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Topics not related to music
Forum Name: I Have A Question For You......?
Forum Description: Ask any question on any subject: if the admin team or any of our members can answer it we will.
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=61877
Printed Date: November 26 2024 at 12:41
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: What does WR mean?
Posted By: TheCaptain
Subject: What does WR mean?
Date Posted: October 08 2009 at 18:19
|
I recently noticed on the Top PA album list there is the rating, the number of ratings and something that says "WR = [some number]." The only thing I can imagine is "weighted rating" but that doesn't make sense because the rating is/was/should be the weighted rating. Thanks in advance for the answer. ------------- Curse your sudden but inevitable betrayal. |
Replies:
Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: October 08 2009 at 18:23
|
Weighted rating. It's a nice feature that shows why an album is exactly where it is (comparing the average ratings to the number of ratings).
------------- https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays |
Posted By: TheProgtologist
Date Posted: October 08 2009 at 18:24
|
Wide Receiver.
Don't you know anything about football?
 -------------  |
Posted By: topofsm
Date Posted: October 08 2009 at 20:01
|
I thought it was "without ratings" as in only counting the ratings with reviews. "weighted rating" didn't make sense, because as TheCaptain said the ratings should be weighted.
What are we looking at now then? ------------- 
|
Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: October 08 2009 at 20:29
That's impossible.
This has 5 ratings, but only two of those are reviews. Both reviews are four star reviews. By that theory, the WR would be 4.0000- but it is not. Let's have another example:
Here is #70 in the 2009 chart, with only one rating (not even a review). Notice the WR- much lower than 5.00! Here's why: An album with two fives will still have a 5.00, but it will chart much higher than an album with one five. That's where the WR comes in. It shows why everything is where it is in the chart, and why a 3.80 can chart much higher than a 4.50 album. I hope I have made Master Dean proud.  ------------- https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays |
topofsm wrote:
Posted By: topofsm
Date Posted: October 08 2009 at 20:58
|
Ahh that makes sense. I assume the point system for ratings for reviewers still applies for the first one, and a different formula is used for the weighted rating:
1 - Rating
5 - Review
10 - Collab review -------------
|
Posted By: SaltyJon
Date Posted: October 09 2009 at 00:33
Weather Report. I don't know what these people are talking about. 
------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Salty_Jon" rel="nofollow"> 
|
Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: October 09 2009 at 01:29
|
There are two "weightings" at work: 1. The weighting between ratings without reviews, normal reviews and collab reviews 2. The weighted algorithm used for sorting ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayesian_average - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayesian_average ) I think that the number currently displayed as the rating only contains the first weighting, while the one named "WR" also contains the second. ------------- https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike |
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: October 09 2009 at 08:19
Dang, I always thought it meant Weird Record. 
------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened... 
|
Posted By: ClemofNazareth
Date Posted: October 09 2009 at 09:51
Right - such as Walter Rasby, former Wide Receiver for the Washington Redskins!
  ------------- "Peace is the only battle worth waging." Albert Camus |