Talk:resource
Add topicIt seems the word is sometimes used to refer to an employer or a team member, without using the word human. As in "Customer is responsile for assigning two project team resources, ... specialist and ... specialist".80.235.62.93 16:20, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
- Never heard the job title "Director of human resources"? I've never heard it used in any other phrase, though. — [ ric ] opiaterein — 16:23, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
- Neither had I heard it without "human", but now came across it in a text, came here to check, and ... apparently didn't notice it.ML-et 22:46, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
- I think that our second definition is exactly what you mean. SemperBlotto 16:24, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
- Yes, I think you're right, I see it now.ML-et 22:46, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
Definition
[edit]| No. | Definition | Description | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. | Something that one uses, especially in manufacturing of goods; a raw material. | The current main one at WT. | Seems misleading to me. Resources include raw materials, office rooms, factory equipment, and computers, regardless of whether the context is manufacturing, don't they? --Daniel Polansky 12:57, 25 June 2008 (UTC) |
| 2. | Any physical or virtual entity of limited availability, or anything used to help one earn a living. | Current WP's defintion. (W:Resource). | Minus: hopelessly abstract. Could be fixed by exemplification. Plus: "limited availability" is the keyword here. What about "library resources" though? They need not be of limited availability, if provided electronically. Could be a separate definition. --Daniel Polansky 12:57, 25 June 2008 (UTC) |
| 3. | Any physical or virtual entity of limited availability. | WP's past definition. | |
| 4. | Natural and human wealth which can be used to satisfy human needs. | WP's past definition. | Minus: The user of a resource--an agent--does not need to be a human agent, at least in some contexts such as artificial intelligence. Even the abstract economics prefers "agent" to "human" AFAIK. |
--Daniel Polansky 12:57, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
Pronunciation: order of possibilities?
[edit]If the pronunciation, which for all regions permits either voiced or unvoiced 's' and stress either on the second or (only with /z/) on the first syllable, should be in order of frequency then I suspect, on the basis of the audio samples, in which UK & CAN stress the 2nd syllable and voice the s (as in /ɹɪˈzɔːs/) while US does both the opposite way (as in /ˈɹiːsɔɹs/), and of my feeling that the order should be changed. PJTraill (talk) 20:22, 25 September 2017 (UTC)