Jump to content

Talk:College Scholastic Ability Test

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Romanisation

[edit]

Romanisation box added. dandan xD 18:23 20 Nov 2006 (AEST)

Test date

[edit]

Something is not right about the "3rd Thursday in November" statement. The past 2 test dates, 12or13-Nov-2008 and 12-Nov-2009 are not 3rd Thursdays. 121.138.91.200 (talk) 07:15, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction

[edit]

I think the "Korea Institute for Curriculum and Examination" might have a new name. This is what I found: http://www.kice.re.kr/en/index.do This is a website for KICE, Korea Institute for Curriculum and Evaluation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.241.110.50 (talk) 04:39, 22 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Praised

[edit]

I have removed the line "CSAT has been praised for its efficiency, meritocratic factors, and high international results." The source cited ('The One-Shot Society' from the Economist) although it mentioned these factors, certainly did not praise them specifically and the tone of the overall article was critical. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 175.196.105.253 (talk) 02:27, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Here are the quotes:

Making so much depend on an exam has several advantages for Korea. It is efficient: a single set of tests identifies intelligent and diligent teenagers, and launches them into society's fast stream. It is meritocratic: poor but clever Koreans can rise to the top by studying very, very hard. The exam's importance prompts children to pay attention in class and parents to hound them about their homework; and that, in turn, ensures that Korea's educational results are the envy of the world. The country is pretty much the leading nation in the scoring system run by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). In 2009 it came fourth after Shanghai, Singapore and Hong Kong, but those are cities rather than full-sized countries.

All the aforementioned factors (efficiency, meritocratic factors, and high international results) have been specifically mentioned and praised. The overall tone is critical, but that doesn't change the information cited. It's been reverted by another user for now.Thanks! -KJ click here 05:03, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Split?

[edit]

Well, I think College Scholastic Ability Test (South Korea)#Preliminary College Scholastic Ability Test(PCSAT) can be split into two article: one for PCSAT and one for Simulated CSAT. If nobody objects, I will split it after 22 Nov. — revimsg 13:20, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Revi: You can split it now, I think. KJ Discuss? 13:03, 26 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah... I almost forgot about this. I'll do it soon. — Revi 13:25, 26 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Don't split. The article is too short to split; see WP:SIZE. --George Ho (talk) 23:24, 1 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Don't worry, I'm too busy in real life to do big edits. — regards, Revi 06:15, 5 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 1 April 2015

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus. Harej (talk) 14:38, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]


College Scholastic Ability Test (South Korea) → College Scholastic Ability Test – Unnecessary disambiguation. But if you disagree, why not comma disambiguation: College Scholastic Ability Test, South Korea? --Relisted. George Ho (talk) 05:59, 8 April 2015 (UTC) George Ho (talk) 23:24, 1 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

AjaxSmack ty. I personally view this as symptomatic of a general failing currently in Wikipedia. A shared category is Category:Standardized tests and in this category I generally prefer the rarely used format of Academic Performance Index (California public schools) which has a redirect from: Academic Performance Index. As with other titles, just by looking at the title I would have no clue in regard to the sphere that the topic related to. Even if I were a person "familiar" with say the subject of testing but lived in another country I would very possibly still have no clue. The category, full of unfamiliar topics, contains a number of subcategories in a "Standardised tests in X location" format. I am guessing that a major reason that this is done is because a primary issue of subject description is location and, I think, it would be easier if, as a general rule, we stuck to the parenthetic clarification system displayed in the Leeds North West and M-185 examples above. As far as I can see the current RM would be just another move in an unencyclopaedic direction. You mention "superfluous disambiguators". I would prefer "encyclopaedic clarifications". We don't talk much about issues like explanation, clarification and description amongst all out talk of disambiguation and I think that this is our loss. GregKaye 06:19, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, you're certainly consistent. I disagree that a title needs to entirely clarify an article's contents. As with most Wikipedia articles, from Arriba Argentinos to Minepa to Wallago attu, one either knows the topic area already or s/he doesn't. In the former case, no problem exists, and in latter case, the text of the article immediately below the title will solve the problem, i.e. clarify the meaning of the term. WP:CONCISE and WP:PRECISE support this position. Without these policies, we would have titles like Arriba Argentinos (Argentine TV news programme) to Minepa (Mozambican evil spirit) to Wallago attu (Southeast Asian catfish) and a tenfold increase in administrative problems with little benefit to readers. —  AjaxSmack  01:05, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose the Suneung tests need to be identifiable from title as Korean. In ictu oculi (talk) 07:39, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose—I think I was the editor to have added the parenthetical item, some time ago. WP went through a period of creating fog around apparently generic article titles (even where capped, which does at least warn the reader-in-search that there's something specific about this article); this was based on a theory hatched by some editor and inserted into the naming guideline without proper scrunity; this was the notion of "primary topic", in other words, first come first served with the shortest, most generic article name. It had superficial attraction of brevity, but brought a bunch of disadvantages. Here, googling the bare, undisambiguated topic is going to annoy the hell out of the reader who clicks on this and finds that it's utterly irrelevant to their needs. As for the comma, I could live with it, but heck, so many titles do have commas that don't delineate between main phrase and disambiguation. Tony (talk) 08:47, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. There's no indication of any other article this name could point to. Directing an undisambiguated title to one with a parentheses is against WP:PRECISE, WP:CONCISE, WP:NATURAL, and common sense.--Cúchullain t/c 17:16, 15 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per Cuchullain. If this were College scholastic ability test (i.e., any test measuring college scholastic ability) it might be a different matter. --BDD (talk) 19:00, 19 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on College Scholastic Ability Test (South Korea). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:53, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on College Scholastic Ability Test (South Korea). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:46, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:College_Scholastic_Ability_Test&oldid=1206746267"