Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
WikiProject iconVital articles: Level 4 / Life C‑class
WikiProject iconRecreation has been listed as a level-4 vital article in Life. If you can improve it, please do.
CThis article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

How Wikipedia works[edit]

I think this says a lot on how wikipedia answers ones questions.

I was bored the other day, and I wanted to have some fun, but I wasn't sure of what to do. So I searched wikipedia on the word "fun".

Then I got redirected to "recreation" which had much to do with sports and such. I read some of it, but then I clicked "See also: Nude recreation" which in small steps took me to this picture of naked yoga

I'm trying that out right now, and "Fun" for me might just happen to be naked yoga.

It's in the word's etymology. What are we re-creating when we recreate?

- 22:31, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

A good question, actually. From what I know, it's meant as 'renewal'. Wisco 20:39, 24 December 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

AISOS (am I stupid or something)? I thought our Islamic friends had Friday as their holy day so including them in the list of people who keep a weekend sabbath seems odd (talk)--BozMo 22:20, 7 May 2004 (UTC)Reply[reply]

In Muslim lands (except Turkey IIRC), Friday is the weekend. In Israel, the weekend is Friday (after noon) and Saturday. Basically, the concept weekend stems from the weekly rest and not the other way around... And calling it a Sabbath is biasing the coverage towards a specific tradition. elpincha 00:00, 4 October 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Recreation I think stemmed from children playing or re-creating what adults did. Recreation can now also include sport activities but I think "leisure" has largely taken over that aspect. -- RND   talk  14:25, 29 June 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Etymology from

[[1]] 1390, "refreshment or curing of a person, refreshment by eating," from O.Fr. recreacion (13c.), from L. recreationem (nom. recreatio) "recovery from illness," from recreatus, pp. of recreare "to refresh, restore," from re- "again" + creare (see create). Meaning "refresh oneself by some amusement" is first recorded c.1400; abbreviated form rec is attested from 1929. Verb recreate "to refresh by physical influence" is attested from c.1560, but not now used, probably from confusion with re-create (q.v.). Recreational is from 1656.

This site is now quoted by 124 Wikipedia articles and 32 Wiktionary articles and has a link on the etymology page. I think other usable sources exist, too. Erudecorp 05:46, 10 October 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Leisure: Really an Umbrella Term[edit]

Recreation fits under the umbrella term of leisure. Those activities that are thought to be "active" ones and participatory are both leisuretime activities and recreational ones. Attending religious services is usually considered leisure but not recreation. However, participating in a volleyball game sponsored by a religious group is considered both leisure and recreation. Volunteerism is always considered leisure but, depending on the volunteerism done, it could recreational or non-recreational. (Examples: Group volunteer gardening around a synagogue or mosque? Recreation. Serving as a usher in a protestant or catholic church? Non-recreation but still leisure.)

Edit required?[edit]

This page is pretty rough as far a Wikipedia's standards go. I understand that it's an abstract topic, but it needs to be treated with a bit more finesse. The citation from TIME magazine about stress is a bit much (Since when does anyone listen to TIME magazine?) and also the list of sports that have become increasingly popular (BASE Jumping, Snowboarding, etc.). That is a very localized statement, and should it not be included in sport anyway?


Who says that recreation is non-profitable. To "be benefitial to" is another definition of profit and recreation is very benefitial to many aspects of our lives.

legal restrictions[edit]

The legal restrictions section seems to be stretching the limits of NPOV. The phrase "arbitrarily viewed as immoral" seems especially egregious.

"...nearly all drugs that have traditionally not been widely used in European culture have been deemed illegal in most of the world."- Can someone prove that Europe's non-acceptance of hard drugs leads to the rest of the world illegalizing them? That's what this sentence implies. If that's not the case, I fail to see why it's necessary to specially mention European culture.


I think this page is great. It may be the best page on wikipedia. And I may sound sarcastic but I'm not, I am totally serious. --Kev

---er someone has vandalized it, how does one go about reporting abuse?


I'm co-opting the redirect "Fun", but I'm quite happy to have it moved to Fun (magazine) as long as a notice is added here =) Adam Cuerden talk 16:04, 19 November 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

British vs. American Spelling[edit]

I noticed the caption for the girl on the tire swing spelled it "tyre" (I believe that is the British way). Is there a rule for Wikipedia English about British vs. American spellings? I'm not favoring one way or the other, I just wondered, since some people might be confused. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) 04:13, 13 December 2006 (UTC).Reply[reply]

The rule is that if the article is about a UK topic, use UK spelling; if a U.S. topic, use U.S. spelling. If neither, whoever gets there first wins! -- Ssilvers 05:55, 14 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Check the etymology of the word and use the more historically sound spelling. That is the foundation for current international standard spellings, not popularity. Why was the u added to colour from the original Latin color? Probably to preserve the accent on the second syllable. But no one in the UK pronounces it that way. So, color. Heuristically, it's better to preserve spelling than pronunciation, because it more often preserves the meaning and history of the word, since pronunciation shifts (see vowel shift). In the same way, the original spelling was tyre, so use tyre, unless the article specifically depends on the US popularity of the spelling tire. UK spellings tend to preserve Germanic words. US spellings tend to preserve Latin words. [[2]] Erudecorp 00:01, 10 October 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Fun vs Recreation[edit]

Why does this article claim that fun is equeal to recreation by redirection of the word "fun" to this particular article? This is hopelessly narrowminded! Fun is so much else than that. Perhaps a seperate article for "fun" is needed. What we think is funny... humour and philosophy along with play and the thrust of human endeavor? Is fun the meaning of life? Ideas?

Yes, let's do it. The article now violates the laws of Wikipedia and humankind in general. To equate fun with recreation is (perhaps not subtly) ridiculous and silly. Erudecorp 08:12, 10 October 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Possible (unchecked) sources:

  1. [|] Ironically has nothing to do with fun. Should go on scary, pedophile and list of serial killers. Along with google:fun, shows how hard it is to find rigorous, relevant truth on the subject of fun.
  2. [| Astro Fun - Ancient Art of Penis Reading] Don't call it irrelevant until you try it. Should go on penis.
  3. [| Etymology of fun]

    1685, v., "to cheat, hoax," probably a variant of M.E. fon "befool" (c.1400), later "trick, hoax, practical joke," of uncertain origin. Stigmatized by Johnson as "a low cant word." Older sense is preserved in phrase to make fun of and funny money "counterfeit bills" (1938, though this may be more for the sake of the rhyme); sense of "amusement" is 1727. See also funny.

  4. [| Halloween Costumes Are Fun For All Ages] Recent news article of something (probably erroneously) deemed fun.
  5. [| Memo from the Making Work More Fun committee] News about fun, work and a committee.
  6. [| Most Popular Work At Home Job Ideas] Popular (not rigorous) ideas of fun.
  7. [| Fun Systematically] This one is for real.

    This position paper looks at two examples where the study of fun is at very least systematic, and quite possibly scientific. In the first, Virtual Crackers, a systematic process of 'deconstructing experience' identifies the individual aspects of an experience (pulling crackers), which are then used to reconstruct a new experience in a new medium (the web). In the second, a generic question about the relationship of fun and engagement is studied through the mutation of examples, slowly changing particular abstract attributes. Neither process is perfectly automatic nor even reproducible, but both exhibit structured methodologies to find results. Scientific? You decide.

  8. [|] Read this before making a new fun article. There may already be a Fun, but called something else, like joy, enjoyment, happiness, amusement, funny, awesome, thrill, peace, sport, yay, vagabond, irreverence, etc.
  9. [| 34 Fun Quotes]
It's kind of fun to do the impossible.
~ Walt Disney (1901 - 1966)
Most of the time I don't have much fun. The rest of the time I don't have any fun at all.
~ Woody Allen (1935 - )
It is fun to be in the same decade with you.
~ Franklin D. Roosevelt (1882 - 1945), in a letter to Winston Churchill

^Erudecorp 08:12, 10 October 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I added something that might be deleted[edit]

"An example of fun could be the fact that most people viewing this article are having fun. Because it is amusing that this article even exists"

Someone might want to delete it. But honestly I think this is an ok thing to put in. So if it is deleted, I will just put it back and try to find the one who deleted it. Unless they have a good reason for it not to exist.

I deleted it. This is an article on recreation, not an article about the article on recreation. Casey Abell 19:13, 20 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Then delete all the other examples. This isn't the article on dancing, eating and drinking, partying, hunting and fishing, hobbies or computer games. Either let the example stay, or delete those too. Using the article itself as an example is fun, making the example true twice over. Erudecorp 04:43, 10 October 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Help:Reverting, WP:NPOVFAQ Casey Abell, stop deleting it. You're defenses continue to be irrelevant and wrong, so then you try another one. Stop. (In response to your latest: It is naturally a matter of opinion; that's what fun is. It is, however, neutral. The addition was not itself opinion, but about opinion. Your reverting defeats itself, because it could be called opinion, too.) Even if you have a personal issue against this, leave it alone. Deleting it is not funny. If you have a contrary statement to make for the sake of NPoV, then add it without deleting the other statement. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Erudecorp (talkcontribs) 17:59, 10 October 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Okay, I'll AGF. "Using the Internet" is already listed as a form of recreation. Which covers any enjoyment people might get from a "Recreation" article existing in Wikipedia. Look, I appreciate that you're trying to inject some humor into the article and the talk page. If you want to write a separate "Fun" article, it's fine with me. I would advise that you write in a reasonably serious way, though, because WP articles - and talk pages - are not supposed to be stand-up comedy routines. There are lots of other places on the Internet for comedy. Casey Abell 18:52, 10 October 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Uh huh? Ok, just as I thought. Wikipiedia is one of the most technical places on the net, but I can't blame wiki for that, I'll just not choose to go here anymore!

Things Have Changed[edit]

I am happy to report that I can let my children on this website once again. when I noted vandalism before, I was telling the truth. But now, the vandalism is gone and my children have been able to come on this website once and for all.

Thank you SO much Wiki!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:49, August 29, 2007 (UTC)

Fun ≠ Recreation[edit]

Please forgive my niavete here but is Fun synonymous with Recreation? --Knowledge is NOT a dirty word 22:56, 16 September 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thou speakest the truth. Fun needs its own article and is distinct from recreation. It is still good to mention fun in the recreation article, but they shouldn't be the same. Erudecorp 23:50, 9 October 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The fun article should itself be fun and not boring, just as all articles differ depending on their subject matter. The irony of a boring fun article is inappropriate. Erudecorp 23:50, 9 October 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

So should the puke article make me puke? Should the sad article make me cry? Erudecorp 00:23, 10 October 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Touché. Erudecorp 00:23, 10 October 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You're both idiots! Of course the fun article should be fun, the vomit article should help you not vomit, and the sad article should help you not be sad. Wikipedia should not be unhelpful. The double-negative cancles out. So, Wikipedia should be helpful, and those looking for fun on Wikipedia should find it. What about those who call fun bad and confine their definition of fun to vain, idle and unproductive acts? Can't work or school be fun? Is only recreation fun? Is recreation ever not fun? Is unfun recreation still either? Erudecorp 04:51, 10 October 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry...[edit] spoil Erudecorp's fun (or recreation), but this edit summary won't tempt me into an edit war. But this article has already seen enough nonsense. Can we please stop adding more gibberish, both in the article and the talk page? Casey Abell 18:02, 10 October 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yeah guys, this is wikipedia, not uncyclopedia (talk) 10:53, 23 October 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

More activity topics...[edit]

I think Dogging should probably be added to the list. It is arguably a hell of a lot more fun than cycling! —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 11:47, 12 August 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Additional Website[edit]

{{editsemiprotected}} You might want to include an external link to . It's a "National Organization of Sports and Recreational Activities".

I'm going to decline this addition. The site no longer works anyway. Adam McCormick (talk) 02:00, 19 November 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Fun is not synonymous with Recreation[edit]

Fun is not synonymous with Recreation, this can be clearly demonstrated as fact, by the existence of jobs that are fun and vacations that are not.

Sean is a game designer he has a job that is concerned with the creation of toys/games, fun in itself and not recreation.

Peter and Jane are given tickets to europe for 2 weeks on the condition that they guide their in-laws around as well.

Peter and Jane have a vacation that is recreation and not fun.

I propose that we make a new page for the definition of fun. Separate from recreation. Seanbutler (talk) 19:38, 18 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Fun not synonymous with Recreation as a very serious discussion, but is it fun?[edit]

Fun is not synonymous with Recreation when, and if, recreation is done to excercise the mind and or body as a serious pursuit. Then recreation becomes a chore, and a bore. People will recreate to avoid burn out, to debrief from a very intensive occurance for example, but a person recreating will not necessarily experience fun. They will "play" to prepare themselves for a state of fun, or they will "play" for fitness to perform a function. They will practice to gain mastery. Recreation, when routine, will lose its joyfulness and fun unless imbued with a sense of unexpected. Fun occurs with or without the pursuit of a goal. Recreation can be fun. Work can be fun. Some people possess the ability to make many moments in their lives fun in all sorts of contexts.

Fun can be described as state of arousal(pyschological term), awakeness, awareness that intensifies pleasant feelings during an occurance. Fun is an action that is easy, refreshing and pleasing all in one feeling. Fun creates sensations of thrill, laughter, spontaneous joy, spontaneous amusement. Fun can be had anywhere, any time, and it cannot be stopped by external forces. People say "you took the fun out of it", erroneously thinking someone has how power to change another's state of being. Only the person expeiencing fun can really change their state of having fun. That is a powerful secret, so don't tell everyone that. It might change the world.

Fun is really a state of mind. Like euphoria, intensive engagement, humans have a hard time sustaining these intense states for very long unless they develop the skill, and habit of playing for fun no matter where they are. People who do that just naturally are "fun to be with". One is having fun when a strong desire to repeat the same experience occurs to the person(s). This is best accomplished without the use of or influence from a psychoactive substance. People need both recreation and fun. People will go to great lenghths to create conditions to repeat the same experience they had while having fun, including using a psychoactive substance to return to that state of fun. But fun-ness is spontaneous, ironic, satirical, joking,and a release from the serious, mundane. It is a form of startle. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:15, 25 February 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]


from under the first paragraph:

"fun to kids is just awesome. it is so cool like dr seuss man his books rock my socks."

looks like people are using this page for recreation. i'm sorry that i can't do this myself, but can someone take care of it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 03:45, 21 April 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Split discussion[edit]

As many of the above comments indicate, fun is not the same as recreation. Add you vote to the discussion of a split.

  • split — I recommend a split of this article. Jason Quinn (talk) 22:25, 18 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Keep merged - this article is terribly short already. Splitting with result in two very stubby articles. Kayau Voting IS evil 13:38, 13 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Um, isn't this article kinda short already? What is there to split? You can rename to "Fun" if you want because I was redirected here searching for that. --WikiDonn (talk) 16:36, 25 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Split Not all fun is recreation, not all recreation is fun. Sithman VIII !! 22:04, 26 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

List of Examples[edit]

In my opinion, the list of examples should only contain very general categories, as in my revision. Otherwise, the list will either become unmanageable, or it will mislead by omitting specific activities. Sithman VIII !! 22:33, 30 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm going to change it back now. If you don't like it, please say so, right here. Sithman VIII !! 19:44, 2 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The list can contain anything to do with recreation in my eyes, this includes individual examples as edited.

Desolutional 16:57, 7 July 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Desolutional (talkcontribs)

I really think that any such list is necessarily POV, unless there are numerous citations for each individual item. I am removing it now, until someone can find reliable sources for some, which I highly doubt. Sithman VIII !! 23:14, 8 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wiki-Links can be incorporated, I think that would provide the needed linkage.

Desolutional 12:03, 11 July 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Desolutional (talkcontribs)

Links would be great, but you're missing my main point. I think that the list, especially if unreferenced, is inherently POV. Sithman VIII !! 19:49, 18 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This has to stop. Until you have the necessary refs, stop re-adding the list of examples. It is becoming harder and harder to assume good faith of you when you keep re-adding it and re-adding it, without finding a single ref or discussing on the talk page. Please stop. Sithman VIII !! 16:21, 20 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Here's a nice ref[edit]

Found in the Outdoor Recreation article. Sithman VIII !! 03:15, 24 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Expansion Oct 31, 2010[edit]

This often vandalized article had at one time been much, much larger, but by now it had been slashed down to just three sentences, not fitting even as an attempt to address the topic of "recreation" (and "fun" redirected to it). So I have tried to give it some new life, expanded it, and then saved from the old deleted copies the paragraph on "Recreation as a profession". I am sure there is more material in the older versions worth reviving. I fully agree with above comments that "Fun" deserves its own article and gave it a brief start.Ekem (talk) 19:39, 31 October 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Redirect "Having fun" to the article "Fun"[edit]

I would do it myself, but I don't know how. Somebody please do it. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ImAlwaysHungry (talkcontribs) 18:59, 30 December 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

WP:R --Abel (talk) 12:15, 9 September 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Double Standard[edit]

Recreation is poorly defined here. Recreation is more like an adjective and not a noun. Not really sure what is going on here...hope you are having fun. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:36, 19 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Recreation. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 19:29, 12 June 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Clarify difference between recreation and entertainment?[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I recommend that this article clarify the difference between the two. From my experience, it seems that entertainment is a subset of recreation, can experts confirm /clarify? Vinay84 (talk) 12:39, 11 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

So if you lost in translation than check synonymes carefully.. (talk) 23:35, 12 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]