Talk:Entertainment

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of WikiProject Media, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to media. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.

Is anyone up to writing some decent text for this page? Just link lists are not that helpful and a good intro to entertainment would be great--BozMo|talk 13:19, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)

This page also seems a little Japan-centric (anime, j-pop, geisha) should be written up to include entertainment from other cultures.

I removed geisha altogether. She is not entertainment in herself, but a performing artist who sings, dances and drinks with her customers. --Himasaram 13:21, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

---

Is it appropriate to link to commercial ticket brokers? I see a fourth link has been added. Willmcw 22:53, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC)

It is Entertainment that makes every day special

[edit] Merge proposal

Guys: If you are going to merge Entertain and Recreation, please attack the problem at the Category level FIRST! It is too easy to just merge the pages. Look at the categories. THAT is where the real work is. You want to merge? Go ahead, but do the real work first: the categories. -- Fplay 06:41, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Don't Merge - Entertainment is different than Recreation SirIsaacBrock 04:25, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Don't Merge - Recreation is participating in the activity to the effect of entertainment, where as entertainment needs no participation in order to be enjoyed. Sach'Moe 21:16, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Don't Merge - Entertainment is a for-profit industry. Recreation as a term on its own, does not necessarily include the profit angle. (sr, March 3, 2006)

Don't Merge - These concepts may be related, but they are very different. (March 16, 2006)

Negative Merge - I've just expanded the entertainment article, so perhaps you all can take my lead from here. FrankB 16:33, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Don't Merge - Compare "History of Entertainment" to "History of Recreation". The former would be about, for example, people in the 18th Century rushing out to buy the latest poetry to read. The latter would be about, for example, the establishment of ski resorts. The concepts are different. However I don't agree with "sr" above that entertainment is a for-profit industry: playing chirades is making entertainment, and nobody profits. "Entertainment: the act of providing or being provided with amusement or enjoyment" vs "Recreation: activity done for enjoyment when one is not working" (Source: Oxford English Dictionary) One is clearly reflexive where as the other involves transmission. RPTB1 20:09, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Irrelevant

Ok: I think the bit on physics is located in the wrong article. It would be better placed on a disambiguation page. Unknown Man 20:48, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

I agree. I'm not sure that it isn't a hoax anyway. A sinusoid is the most fundamental component of any signal, so one cannot create a single sinusoid by the combination of two other signals. Dontdoit 01:27, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

It's surely a joke! I can't find a single physics entry for the word entertainment in Google. So I've removed that section entirely. Perhaps whoever wrote it could explain what they meant. I've parked a copy below:

==Entertainment In Physics==

Entertainment is much like Resonance. Entertainment is a process in where the frequency of one system is combined with the frequency of another system, to generate a single wave. This can been seen in electroencephalogram (EEG) waves, where combinations of separate frequencies combine to form a single sinusoidal wave. This can be an instance of two objects with multiple frequencies, achieving the same frequency. - Adrian Pingstone 09:20, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rewrite

I've totally rewritten the article because the text seemed jammed on talking about participation all the time, and the writing style was poor. For the definition of entertainment I've used the Oxford Dictionary. I know the article can be improved further but it's a start - Adrian Pingstone 17:16, 26 July 2006 (UTC)