Talk:Master data

I'm not a programmer. This is all gobbledegook to me. Examples would help hugely (as there are for reference data). And even more so if the two sets of examples were contrasted on the same page, without needing to click the "reference data". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.11.233.73 (talk) 06:41, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Definition of Master Data
Not sure whether other sites have taken the definition from here, or whether the original editor was confused by inaccurate definitions elsewhere as no sources were given. Previous version of seriously confused reference data (key information) with master data (master copy of information shared by two or more business processes, applications or consumers). Have started to clean up, adding references, but have yet to find more academic back-up similar to what I was taught 30+ years ago. MaryEFreeman (talk)

Totally agree. Thanks for cleaning this up. I have some books on MDM at work, which might be a good reference. I'll check this. Joachim Selke — Preceding undated comment added 14:51, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

"Master data should be distinguished from reference data. While both provide context for business transactions, reference data is concerned with classification and categorisation, while master data is concerned with business entities." => has no reference. In my understanding, reference data is externally given/managed (ISO-codes, UPC, CAS Numbers), while master data is managed inside the enterprise. Interestingly, the lines are blurring - e.g. when business moves to market places, business-partners (suppliers or customers) might have a reference-IDs and their attributes like names or addresses are managed elsewhere .... 217.27.192.163 (talk) 15:35, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

Management challenges
I think that the management challenges and needs section should be moved or integrated into the Master Data Management Wikipedia article.

Also, if Kaleido is the reference for the information posted, it should be evaluated for neutral POV... each organization defines master data differently, with software providers usually favoring the definition to that organization's product. We need to make sure this isn't a commercial plug, or biased in any way.

Will review. Please followup.

Joepiskai 15:39, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Merge from
Master data and Master Data should be merged. They fairly clearly discuss the same topic, but each has some unique content as of the time of this writing. I believe Master data should be the surviving title per WP:NAME, but please check me on that.Cander0000 (talk) 23:33, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
 * This seems to have been done as Master Data now redirects here MaryEFreeman (talk)

Inclusion and Diversity attention
There have been many discussions regarding the appropriateness of terms such as master/slave, but very little is easily found via web searches regarding potential replacements of the term "master" in "master data" and "master data management".

It is particularly problematic because of the specific definition of the term "master data" and several of the easy synonyms such as "key data", "reference data", or "main data" either conflict with other definitions or are not clear enough.

I bring this up on the talk page of Wikipedia not to try to generate discussion or find a resolution, but to inquire whether any people knowledgable in this field might have useful citations, references, or links to discussion on this topic that could be added to the article.

As an example, take a look at the section on the article Master/slave (technology) for "Terminology concerns".

Daniel (talk) 14:53, 17 June 2021 (UTC)