Talk:Data cube

This article should refer to OLAP Cube

Most sensible to me seems to delete this page and make it refer to OLAP Cube Phdb (talk) 13:53, 18 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No it shouldn't, unless OLAP cube can be made to specifically address spectroscopy. 98.169.164.41 (talk) 05:03, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

On deletion and notability

I don't log into wikipedia a lot these days, because it's not nearly as much fun now that wikilawyering is more popular than expansion. But I happened to notice that "Data cube" was put up for deletion by Stuartyeates, for some combination of looking dictionary-ish and being a stub. While I did write the stub article originally, I don't particularly care if it gets deleted or not -- I'm too Lazy even to fix it up with references into the numerous articles in Astrophysical Journal, Solar Physics, or Journal of Geophysical Research (to name three) that establish notability, or to clean up the definition to be more than a stub -- but I fail to see a difference in definitional style between, say, Data Cube and Passband, which is not up for deletion. IMHO the article needs to be fixed-up, not deleted, and I have accordingly removed the call for deletion. zowie (talk) 17:51, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe this article can be merged with the OLAP cube article? I don't see the distinction, and the mathematical definition section seems to define the same thing that this article describes. FWIW, "data cube" seems like the more general term for that page and should be its title, with "OLAP cube" being a more domain-specific name for the same thing. Tag (talk) 13:53, 22 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't delete the entry (while feeling free to link it to wherever you want, of course). This term is starting to appear in the public media and the article is just of the right depth to unpuzzle general readers, like me. I've just been given the job of translating a news item that describes this tool, and this entry gives me precisely the background I need, neither more nor less. Thanks, --Remotelysensed (talk) 16:55, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Notability and Verifiability

Have worked on the text and hope the concerns are settled now - apart from adding content (so that i's no a stub any longer) I have added more references showing relevance of this topic in science, industry, and business. For sure more could be done, but I hope that, first of all, lifts the article out of the concerns expressed several years back. I'm glad to discuss all, of course. Pebau.grandauer (talk) 12:25, 27 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]