Talk:Condition-based maintenance/Archives/2015

Introduction is not succinct

The second paragraph of the introduction adds very little to the article: "This concept is applicable to mission critical systems that incorporate active redundancy and fault reporting. It is also applicable to non-mission critical systems that lack redundancy and fault reporting." Essentially because it is application to both mission critical and non-mission critical, no information is added. Similar things can be said for redundancy and fault reporting. I recommend removing this. 128.2.65.215 (talk) 04:32, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

A Contrivance not worthy of being in an encyclopedia

The term itself is taken from a poor quality schoolbook which has no citation. It creates a situation to describe that is already self evident (or a relabeling of something already described by other university books) - a contrivance.

The article blatantly injects as fact things which would never be sure. It also NEGLECTS the whole reason a factory might choose not to do it (cause and effect of down time).

"Improved system reliability"

there is no "scientific or business consensus" that an item is more or less this or that if one fixes it only after it breaks

"fix it only if it breaks" needs no describing. an elementary school child would know

please stop bloviating poor quality college material in the encyclopedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.209.223.190 (talk) 20:59, 17 June 2015 (UTC)