Talk:Information lifecycle management
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
|
|
Merge edit
Merge into Information_lifecycle_management proposed. The latter article is the better and more comprehensive one. Kff 13:17, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
- The text of Information_lifecycle_management was lost due the the fact, that the merge was done in the wrong direction. Kff 17:11, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
2009-12-06 - Kebriones writes: The following statement is not quite accurate: "Disposition is the practice of handling information that is less frequently accessed or has met its assigned retention periods. Less frequently accessed records may be considered for relocation to an 'inactive records facility' until they have met their assigned retention period. "
'Disposition' has several meanings, but in this context it means primarily 'arrangement or placement', and commonly refers directly or indirectly to the physical location of information, and/or type of storage. The disposition of information can, be such that it is quickly available (to hand in the office), available with a delay (e.g. for retrieval from a distant location) or not available at all. "Final Disposition" is commonly destruction, but can also be "permanent retention" (e.g. in an historical archive). Kebriones (talk) 08:48, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
Requested move 2 October 2016 edit
- The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: IAR closing as uncontroversial. Could have been filed at WP:RMT per WP:NCCAPS Move as proposed (non-admin closure) — Andy W. (talk · ctb) 01:46, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Information Lifecycle Management → Information lifecycle management – In English, only proper nouns have capital letters, so since this subject is a generic concept, English rules (nor marketese) would use lower case. It appears back in 2006 there were two articles, and the merge was done to this one instead of the lower case one. W Nowicki (talk) 20:33, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.