Talk:Risk matrix

message: is this practiced by insurance companies?
Yes this is practied by insurance companies in certain cases, this is not oftenly used.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.226.203.201 (talk) 10:26, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Much of the contents of this page are incorrect and inconsistent with the Wikipedia article on risk. This article should be withdrawn until it can undergo a complete revision.
DonFiresmith (talk) 17:44, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  This page needs a complete rewrite 

message: The article is overly simplistic and misleading. For example, the opening sentence "A Risk is the amount of harm that can be expected to occur during a given time period due to specific harm event".  Er, says who?  Not according to the International Standard for Risk Management (ISO31000) which defines risk as "the effect of uncertainty on objectives". ISO31000 goes on to explicitly state that risk includes both positive and negative outcomes (Ie. Not just 'harm' but also benefits).
I'm a wiki novice so don't want to mess with the article until I know what I'm doing, but I am a risk management professional.  The wiki article leans heavily on a single article by Tony Cox. My counter to that (What's Right with Risk Matrices?) probably has a more balanced view of their application. If you google "What's Right with Risk Matrices?" you'll find it.   I'm also lead author of the Security Risk Management Body of Knowledge (published by Wileys) which contains some useful references on risk matrices.  
I promise to learn more about writing in wikipedia and contribute some actual changes, but in the meantime, I hope the above is useful to the discussion. --Juliantalbot (talk) 07:11, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Concur 

message: The risk matrix examples in the article use ordinal scales. When the scales are ordinal, the mapping of probability and consequence to risk level cannot be objective. The risk matrix itself defines the mapping and can neither be said to be right nor wrong. The risk matrix is unauditable when the scales are ordinal. Scales may also be ratio type and often are. Thresholds between risk levels may also be defined with ratio scales. Then, with everything quantified on ratio scales, the mapping may be developed objectively. It is difficult to improve the article in this respect because there are no peer-reviewed articles on this aspect. If Wikipedia allowed original research to be cited, then something could be done to improve the article. By ordinal and ratio, I am using the terminology of Stanley Stevens Level of measurement. FightingWriting (talk) 06:30, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: But Wikipedia does not allow original research or extensive unsourced contributions of personal knowledge. Please provide independent reliable sources for these findings. WP:Verifiability is a core policy and not to be replaced by rhetorical arguments to ignore it. GermanJoe (talk) 20:23, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: But what independent reliable source was presented to support the risk matrix with ordinal scales shown in the article? None! The matrix was just made up (invented). It could equally have been made up with ratio scales. If a matrix with ordinal scales can be presented without a source, then surely a matrix with ratio scales can be presented without a source? FightingWriting (talk) 02:51, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: If you disagree with existing content (for example as unsourced, factually inaccurate, non-neutral, or for whatever other editorial reason), please tag these problems, or improve the questionable content to fix the existing issue (or delete it as a worst-case scenario, only if the disputed content is not salvageable by any other means). You shouldn't add additional similarly flawed content - that just worsens an existing problem. GermanJoe (talk) 03:23, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ordinal vs Ratio Scales