Talk:Document management system

message: As it stands currently, 29 May, 2008, this section reads like an excerpt from someone's academic research paper.  And yet, it says so little.  At least as far as an informative encyclopaedia article for wikipedia is concerned.  I really have a sense that when finish reading that section, I wonder "what did I just learn?" And the answer, sadly, is very little.  I am tempted to be bold and remove this section.  But I thought I'd throw it up here on the discussion board, to see what the consensus is. Maybe useful nuggets can be salvaged?  --Docmgmt (talk) 20:43, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Removing the "Document_Management_and_Communication" section

message: :Document Management (also known as Electronic Document Management - EDM) is an information technology that has evolved over the past two decades from a basic "electronic filing cabinet" which is stored scanned documents and images in electronic form on a server that could capture, index, and retrieve for future use.  Today, Document Management is part of the Enterprise Content Management and is a subset of Knowledge or Information Management.
:Document management  have matured from a basic archival and retrieval system to a complete information management solution. With technological advances, we have available to us the tools to properly manage paper documents and electronic files. You can store and index voice recordings, faxes, videos, pictures, drawings, computer output, and many other types of paper and electronic files. Workflow is now handled electronically rather than manually. Information can also be extracted from word processing software to populated fields in databases. You can store, catalog, and redistribute information via fax, email, internet or print it to paper or CD to share with one individual or the masses at a fraction of the cost. 
:Document management is a way to easily manage your paper files electronically and create more office space as well as saving time instead of spending precious minutes trying to find that paper document. Paper documents are scanned in and made into an image file (such as .tif) and filed electronically onto a computer storage hardware. You can easily retrieve, annotate, index and archive these files.
This should be integrated in the main text.
— David Remahl 23:23, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Definitions of Document Management

message: I went through the external links one by one and ended up removing them all after reviewing WP:EL and WP:SPAM.  Sorry if I removed ones of value. --Ronz 20:18, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: External Links

message: I question whether Document Management is necessarily tied to computers.  After all, what were we doing in libraries (especially those with journals) when we had to create index cards (title, author, main subject classifications, know the publisher, know which shelf (consider Dewey classification system), know who/when/when-due-back for borrowers, etc.
I'd recommend a general discussion of Document Management issues WITHOUT mentioning electronic computing.
Library_science and Records_Management are also worth looking at for linkages.
:I couldn't agree with this more.  We use a EDM system where I work, but the principles of document control are still valid for documents that are not in the system and need to be applied across the board.  If anything EDM should be a subset of a more general discussion of document management/control.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.178.212.99 (talk) 18:42, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  non-Electronic linkages 

message: I have removed the following links "external references" as they appear to be advertisements and not references. If somebody wants to create a list of DMS vendors please go ahead, but stop putting up randomly chosen vendors.
www.imaginedocs.com
www.hoatechvn.com.vn
: It would be great to have a list of providers who implemented the "Document management system", especially if there are some under the GNU license as well. I just posted this note, so that you know that there is indeed interest for it. :) Thank You. --HappyInGeneral 14:33, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  So far I think I found FileNet. --HappyInGeneral 14:33, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: How about including only vendors who rank highly enough to have their own pages in Wikipedia?LCP 18:37, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I don't necessarily think that is a good idea, since perhaps the whole subject is not very main stream. So collecting these would be far more beneficial, then removing them on site, like here: . --HappyInGeneral (talk) 08:42, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  By the way, good job with this (Document_management_system#Document_management_systems) section, however I still think that it could be more complete. --HappyInGeneral (talk) 08:44, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: References 

message: The reason that I ask this is I found two versions
http://www.fda.gov/ora/compliance_ref/bimo/ffinalcct.pdf
http://www.fda.gov/cder/guidance/7359fnl.pdf
--222.67.215.110 (talk) 07:02, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is the ref 2 the latest...? 

message: Have a look at the orginal version
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Document_management_system&diff=225732511&oldid=225730748
--222.67.200.216 (talk) 09:40, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  The standardization section has got errors...... 

message: I believe that the concept of a document management system is a sister concept to content management system, yet is still a distinct concept, therefore requires its own page (see http://www.hci.com.au/hcisite3/journal/List%20of%20document%20management%20software.htm http://www.atrove.com/ and http://sdms.cafuego.net/what.html for places where the term DMS is used in a way significantly distinct from CMS). When a customer of providers of such software is looking for solutions, they will specifically seek a *document* management system.
Rather than merging, it would seem that there needs to be some work put into better separating the concepts (see Talk:Content_management_system)
--Hohlram (talk) 02:46, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merging with Content Management System 

message: The embedded list of what amounts to a complete catalogue of 'see also' links would be better as a category. It has become an extensive commercial directory of products which is not suitable for an article about DMS. Would anyone care to justify retaining it in this form or should it just be turned into a category in its own right?—Ash (talk) 19:05, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I have removed this section as it fails WP:DIRECTORY by becoming a dumping ground for an endless list of systems. I have copied the text here in case anyone feels strong enough about it to create a special category for these systems.—Ash (talk) 16:18, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Document management systems embedded list falls foul of [[WP:DIRECTORY]]? 

message: List of document management systems seems to be coloured.
Look at the list Gartner, Forrester and others present as markted leaders, these suppiers are not listed!
Example: OpenText LiveLink is not in the list; used by Unilever, Shell, Philips and other large companies as main document storage, share, find and retreval system. 145.7.182.163 (talk) 08:39, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  list seems very incomplete 

message: I have removed this section for the second time (last time it was called Document Management Systems) as it fails WP:DIRECTORY by becoming a dumping ground for an endless list of software. I have copied the text here in case anyone feels strong enough about it to create a special category.—Ash (talk) 08:23, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Examples of Document Management software" falls foul of [[WP:DIRECTORY]] - 2nd time removed 

message: I was just wondering whether a link to document management news at http://www.documentmanagementnews.com would be a good idea in the resources section. It seems to give a fairly unbiased view of day to day document management news as well as having forums and a glossary and appears to be the update of document management avenue that's in the DMOZ category. I'm not going to add it without a little discussion from people though? .—Saigon2010S (talk)   —Preceding undated comment added 12:49, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I think if you have a conflict of interest, you should be upfront and declare it. Particularly if you happen to be the owner of the site in question; as I suspect is the case based on the WP account name you have chosen.—Ash (talk) 13:20, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Addition of Document Management News link 

message: * Documentation#Info about the nomenclature, taxonomy, classification and codification......  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.64.17.1 (talk) 06:05, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  FYI...... 

message: SUGGESTION: to include a section answering "What de intersections and differences between CMS and DMS?" --Krauss (talk) 12:19, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Need for section explaning DMS vs CMS 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Document management system. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111029013250/http://www.policystat.com:80/health-systems-or-networks/ to http://www.policystat.com/health-systems-or-networks/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:50, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Given that I came to the page looking for an example of a DMS, I was quite surprised that there were exactly zero named anywhere on the page. This is extremely rare for any page that describes a software system type: I checked Operating System, Web Browser, Word Processor, Blog and Wiki:  each gave canonical/most-popular examples in the lede. I can understand that arbitrary lists are not Wikipedia-like, but there need to be SOME examples. 97.105.71.154 (talk) 15:28, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing examples. 

message: DMS should be linked to the term e-Services. DMS system can be middleware between WEB applications on front office and Backend application on BackOffice. Using such concept we have in Poland many new e-services like e-prescriptions, e-invoices, e-office, m-citizen and many others e-government and e-commerce services accorrdingly to the ITIL Library. Marek Prasoł (talk) 07:08, 27 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  DMS as a middleware platform between Front-end and Back-end applications 

message: The document control subsection begins: “Government regulations require that companies working in certain industries control their documents.” Would it be true to say “In many countries, government regulations...” or perhaps “In most countries.. .”? I don’t know the answer or how to find out, but as it stands it leaves me wondering which governments it refers to. There are EU and US examples later in the paragraph. --Northernhenge (talk) 10:17, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I've added the word "typically" (and some general fixes) --Northernhenge (talk) 20:09, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Document control