Talk:Content

Untitled

Sex

disambig or something else?

Should this page be a disambig? Or (somehow) expanded into an article?? Ewlyahoocom 02:57, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think the article now should be about "Information as distinct from its mode or channel of presentation" with a see also at the bottom for the mathematical use of the term and satisfaction. Hyacinth 09:55, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It seems like it should either be a very cut-down disambiguation page, or not a page at all. Most of the entries are either dictionary definitions or vague. The only valid ones seem to be Open content and Free content. -- Nataly a 18:00, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I strongly disagree with the reorganization of this article. It is completely contradictory to say on the one hand that content is information as distinct from its mode of presentation and then to day that there are things such as "open content," "Web content" and "free content." Either content from a publishing perspective is synonymous with information or it is not. It is my contention that it is not. The definition that I offered before seemed to address the distinction clearly:

"Information and experiences created by individuals, institutions and technologies to benefit audiences in venues that they value." Information without an audience is NOT content. The article on information is very erudite, but it does not even mention the word "publish" or "publishing" or "audience." User:Jblossom 19:00, 1 November 2006

The other meaning of content

Shouldn't there be a disambig page to this meaning of 'content' and the emotional meaning of 'content'? Fephisto 06:02, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

i agree to the defintion but i believe that contentness is also an emotion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.241.210.193 (talk) 18:06, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If there is not an article for it, then it doesn't need to be disambiguated on the wikipedia. That's what dictionaries are for. Oicumayberight (talk) 18:52, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you're talking about a link to Contentment, then I agree. ptmc2112 (talk | contributions) 16:35, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done ptmc2112 (talk | contributions) 15:11, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

by jackaline willson best selling book author —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.236.153.28 (talk) 16:58, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Link to Content analysis added; Content provider redirect makes no sense

Hello,

Today I added a link under media to Content Analysis, an important methodology in the social sciences and humanities particularly in terms of researching authorship.

In checking other links I found the redirect from Content provider to Value-added service to make no sense; the value-added service provider is bundling content from content providers with other offerings, and phone companies are not the sole purveyors of content for re-selling. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.130.81.139 (talk) 19:25, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Economics

Shridevi ganachari specilation in economics content written. With some pages. Can accept some money form these . I need it's urgent for me . Reply 7975051841 103.58.152.127 (talk) 15:01, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]