[dTal]

>Data is a plural count noun not, standardly speaking, a mass noun. [Note: "Data is rarely used as a plural today, just as candelabra and agenda long ago ceased to be plurals," Pinker writes. "But I still like it."]

So... if a meaning is "rarely used today", and the author admits it's just personal preference, surely it shouldn't be on the list? I've seen some serious contortions in academic papers that try to use 'data' as a mass noun but still pedantically write "data are" instead of "data is". I've concluded at this point it's essentially an academic shibboleth.