Talk:Data maintenance

Is the maintenance of data a field unto itself?

Answer

No, I think Data maintenance is involved in the day-to-day conduct of many other, related but unspecific fields. Data maintenance is simply a term, which is usually used to describe the actions of a user or administrator of a data base

Harkonlucas 15:09, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure I understand why it's important to emphasize here that files are represented on disk as binary but "often edited purely in it's slightly higher than low level/[binary] form." Nor am I sure that I know what that phrase is supposed to mean. I took a stab at rewriting it anyway. :D Since SCADA (listed under "See Also") doesn't seem to mention "data maintenance", are there any better examples? And, of course, references. Jaeger5432 | Talk 17:37, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Examples

@Harkonlucas: It's nice to have the examples of "data maintenance", but:

"The banker conducted data maintenance routines" doesn't tell us anything at all about what this involves, or how he did this, or even really how long it took. It may confirm (or not) the fact that the two words have been used together, but "a little read short story by an unknown author" isn't an easy source to track down. Also, if it's fictional, it might as well say that "the banker flew home in his quantum-fusion powered hover-car" - showing up in a work of fiction doesn't provide evidence that it exists.
Where did General Van Richtinmeyer write that, or in what source was he quoted? WP seems to be the only mention of him online at all. Also, that quote only confirms that "data maintenance" is something done to "insure the integrity of ... data", which is pretty much the same as what you wrote originally.
Who's this "Justin James McCorkle"? The position (and date) suggests that you're providing a source by quoting from (or citing) him, but again, what's the original source material? if it's a book, how about the title? if it's a quote in an article or magazine, we need the complete reference. (The March 2007 date matches up with most of your edits that helped rescue this from being an obscure stub. If you're citing yourself, that's not going to work - WP isnt' the place for "original research", just to collect research that's already been published. Also, nobody "owns" even their own work on WP.) I'm not saying that you're doing this, just trying to think of possible reasons for putting in a random name there :) Jaeger5432 | Talk 20:56, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Since I still can't find anything about the mysterious Mr McCorkle, the General, or this short story, I removed all three "examples" - they really don't seem to add anything, especially if they can't be verified.

Okay, the three "examples" got put back in, as well as the "citation" to the mysterious Mr. McCorkle. I still don't think that they add anything to help the reader understand what data maintenance *is*, nor do the sources seem encyclopedic. Rather than go back and forth on this, can we talk here about why you think the material should be included? (Repeat of a request made last week on your talk page.) Jaeger5432 | Talk 23:18, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently Justin McCorkle is you. It kind of looks like the whole article is original research - I still can't find any trace of sources for the "examples" you added. If you're claiming individual credit for your work, remember that we don't do that here - "Since no one "owns" any part of any article, if you create or edit an article, you should not sign it" (from WP:OWN). Jaeger5432 | Talk 18:45, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]