Jump to content

Talk:Hobby

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

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 13 February 2019 and 3 May 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Rmj17.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 23:45, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pet keeping

[edit]

maybe generic Pet keeping section with fish-keepin g paragraph would be more encyclopedic? 217.144.30.156 (talk) 20:18, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I believe raising, caring for and training pets is a Making and Tinkering kind of hobby.BhaskarNS (talk) 18:21, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

'Open Fire' Cooking

[edit]

I believe the paragraph in reference to 'open fire' cooking is not only completely inaccurate but irrelevant to the subject at hand. Burning food actually renders it more unhealthy due to carcinogens and a hiobby is any thing nivfdchwEGLwhatnot. 96.53.84.50 (talk) 07:15, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. The article is on hobbies, not cooking. I also agree it was inaccurate. Bobby I'm Here, Are You There? 11:06, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Are Porter Blanchard and Arthur Stone silversmithing hobbyists, or professionals? I really really think that a list of famous hobbyists is inappropriate, and professionals certainly don't belong here, either. --MichaelTinkler

IMHO a new section under "Visual Arts and Design" called something like "Traditional Crafts". Included would be areas like silversmith, glass working, blacksmith, and woodworking.

Traditional visual arts:

Painting Drawing Sculpture Photography Crafts **HERE**

Design:

[Fashion design]? Graphic design [Interior decoration]? Crafts *HERE* (or maybe here) [Industrial design]?

I am not sure describing a hobby as spare-time is politically correct. I think we should describe it as recreational.

Isn't it important to add a section on "Importance of hobby in human life" - as it is commonly observed that people without a 'serious' hobby often die of boredom after they retire ;). Hobbies make life more meaningful and satisfying for many people. A section is needed.

Etymology of hobby

[edit]

The etymology section for the word "hobby" seems very unsatisfactory to me. Why is a hobby horse called a hobby horse? Where does the hobby part come from? Yours Martin (Sorry, I can't find tildes on my computer) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.3.127.153 (talk) 09:50, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Video Games

[edit]

Although they are mentioned, its made to seem as if they are only an alternative to hobbies. Video games are the hobby of many, I will construct an entry touching on the hobby of "video games". If there any logical disputes, make your claim. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maikeruda (talkcontribs) 22:19, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What's the difference between a hobbyist and an amateur?

[edit]

The definition given in the lede isn't very clear:

"A person who engages in an activity solely for fun is called a 'hobbyist' ... an 'amateur' does so out of personal interest in an activity."

What is the difference between "fun" and "personal interest"? (If they're not identicle, there is at least a very big overlap). Also, the lede defines a 'professional' as someone who generally engages in an activity for reward. That seems an overly broad definition (If I look after my neighbour's cats while he is on holiday and he gives me some bottles of beer as payment, that doesn't make me a professional cat-sitter). Shouldn't it be "for their main source of income", or something similar? Iapetus (talk) 17:35, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Iapetus, the problem is that within different fields, the terms have different meanings. Take sports: A professional athlete is one who is paid for being an athlete -- it's their job. An amateur is generally someone who, without pay, plays the sport as part of an organized group (including, but not limited to school teams, Olympics, etc.). If the term 'hobbyist' is applied to someone who plays certain sports, it would be at a lower level than organized sports -- perhaps someone who plays certain sports on an occasional basis just for fun. A player may even move between classifications from time to time. For example, a professional hockey player may be selected to represent his or her country in the Olympics, or a college basketball player may be drafted by the NBA or WNBA, or a weekend golfer may be given the chance to participate in an organized golf tournament.
Outside of sports, the distinctions become more murky. A well-known author of fictional works may enjoy anonymously editing Wikipedia as a hobby. In this example, the word amateur may be seen as a criticism of the quality of work, rather than a classification of the writer. Within some fields, an amateur or hobbyist may actually have better skills than some professionals, especially those who, while being paid to do their job, are still fairly inexperienced at it. For example, an amateur radio operator who has been actively pursuing that hobby for thirty or forty years probably knows more about radio than, say, a young soldier who just finished training as a radio operator and has received his or her first assignment.
Ultimately, the differences come down to context, and that is a hard thing to define. Etamni | ✉   19:17, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have been reading about the history of hobbies and the term amateur has never been mentioned as far as I can recall. I think your point at the top is correct. Hobbies are done for fun, which is also personal interest. The definitions of hobby are remarkably similar, as is the one at the top of the article. However there is a strong sense in hobbies that they are 'worthy' in nature. They produce satisfaction through a sense of achievement, and quite often a product of some kind. Travers (talk) 23:43, 15 January 2016 (UTC)travers Done a bit more reading on the subject and the professional Vs amateur issue never appears. Think it should be removed because it has no place. In fact, some hobbies are quite lucrative and become an important source of income. A hobby that involves trading in some way is still a hobby. Travers (talk) 04:05, 11 February 2016 (UTC)travers[reply]

Reducing the Scale modeling/dioramas section

[edit]

There seems to be a significant inconsistency in the length of the Scale modeling/dioramas section. It is much larger than other sections and goes into great detail about a particular category of hobbies. The link to Model Engineering takes one to a high quality article that covers the relevant detail. I suggest that it be reduced to a brief overview of the modelling category of hobbies. Travers (talk) 04:05, 15 February 2016 (UTC)travers[reply]

New section headings for Types of Hobbies

[edit]

I have modified the headings to conform to Stebbins' categorisation of hobbies, and placed the existing material under the 5 headings. Sorting hobbies into categories seems very awkward and the Stebbins ones are the best I can find. The headings in this article do not conform at all to those in the larger List of Hobbies article, which is a problem.

Travers (talk) 04:05, 20 February 2016 (UTC)travers[reply]

Thank you Travers. This is very useful. I believe I still have not understood what comes under 'Activity Participation'. Liberal Arts seem to have too many points of academic interest. Instead, wouldn't it be better to include only The Arts? Where would we include Pet related hobbies? What about Blogging and Hacking? Also, what do you think of Spotting and Observation related hobbies? - BhaskarNS (talk) 12:58, 28 January 2018 (UTC))[reply]

Blogging, Hacking

[edit]

Where do we include blogging, hacking and other online or technology related hobbies?

Arts or Tinkering?

[edit]

Under the 'Liberal arts pursuits' section there is a mention about 'higher-end projects like building or restoring a car, or building a computer from scratch.'. I think these are better suited for 'Making and tinkering' section? I'll wait for inputs till 29-Jan-2018 and go ahead with this change if there are no comments.

Different dimension

[edit]

When I look at certain hobbies like Music, there seem to be various sub-categories to it. Some people enjoy listening to music. They track certain artists and genres. Attend concerts. But they may not do it themselves. Where do you put that? Also, there are people who learn and perform, but do not compose. And then there are people who make music. How do we categorise this a) listening, b) learning & performing, c) composing. Do all of them come under 'Liberal Arts Pursuits'? Similarly, how do we differentiate between a) watching movies, and b) making movies? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bhaskarns (talkcontribs) 08:36, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Liberal Arts or just The Arts?

[edit]

In today's context, 'Liberal Arts' is a very broad subject. I believe that the scope of Hobby is only 'The Arts'. Other topics get into education / academics, which by definition is not a hobby. I'll wait for inputs till 29-Jan-2018 and go ahead with this change if there are no comments. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bhaskarns (talkcontribs) 17:56, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Spotting and Observation

[edit]

I wasn't quite clear where to add Spotting and Observation kind of hobbies based on Stebbin's classification. Initially, I thought it is 'Activity participation', but don't all activities involve some kind of activity? :) Have a look at these Observation hobbies. It seems the objective here is to mentally record or collect whatever is being spotted or observed. Hence, could they be part of 'Collecting'? - BhaskarNS (talk) 12:28, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Edits to Hobby

[edit]

Good morning, everyone! For my college course, I plan to edit this article over the course of the next few weeks. After a close reading of Hobby, I gathered that the purpose of this article is to provide an understanding of what a hobby is, rather than listing different hobbies. Looking at my long term goals (next few weeks), I plan on making some major edits, through reorganizing and rewording information to further convey the purpose in the most effective way. My goal is to open a door for us to improve Hobby in a way that reflects Wikipedia’s purpose and pillars. The short term goals will take place over the next week and will focus on restructuring information. I will not be posting the edits till later in the week, but plan on working on my ideas in my sandbox here: Hobby Sandbox. I would love to connect with some of you about your ideas, questions, and any advice you would be willing to extend to me! --Rmj17 (talk) 16:49, 3 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi everyone! I made some significant changes to the lead in my sandbox. Please take a look at it, and let me know your thoughts! Rmj17 (talk) 21:30, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Would it be possible to change this section title to "Hobbyists" to incorporate the information covered in the proceeding paragraph. After reading the information, it appeared to discuss the topic of hobbyists more than merely hobbies and related activities. Any thoughts? Rmj17 (talk) 04:06, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A To-Do List?

[edit]

In the interests of improving this article, would it be a good idea to introduce a 'to-do list'? It looks like this article's talk page has a lot of thoughts being thrown around and an effort to organise them seems worthwhile.

The article states that it is of 'level 5 - vital' importance but is of 'Start class' quality (Start Class Criteria). Does anyone know the last time that this was checked?

I am new to Wikipedia editing, so I'm sorry if I don't know what I'm talking about.

SeparateTitan92 (talk) 09:21, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Time pass" listed at Redirects for discussion

[edit]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Time pass and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 April 17#Time pass until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 23:04, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Readers and editors of this page may have an interest in this ongoing deletion nomination. Randy Kryn (talk) 22:53, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]