Data, Information, Knowledge, Wisdom is a model that we have all used at some point to help an audience usefully distinguish between different aspects of what we do. It's not a bad model. It has explanatory power. The reason that I'm asking is that I think it works counter to what we want - which is to have us and our profession associated with results (as opposed to wisdom which no one can understand without four hours of explaining).
This is the most detailed discussion and critique of DIKW of which I am aware: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/fde0/d2b7da419d66f1cdbc7cce8ff37116254cf3.pdf?_ga=2.4577587.1434888394.1637978476-1280921422.1634964572