I agree that defining terms is important. FYI, I think you should consult a external reference for a definition of meaningful, as you did much higher up the thread with "data". Your usage of the word seems unusually specific, specifically the "automatically" part referring to data without further analysis. Collecting and analyzing data is what researchers do, so requiring data to be useful without analysis is baffling. Several commenters have tried to correct your definition.
Even data without pristine integrity can be collected and analyzed to create something meaningful. For an example of that, how about neurosynth.org - this uses an automatic scraper to collect coordinates from published neuroimaging papers. The scraper does as scrapers do and collects all sorts of false positives, so many of the "coordinates" are in fact not. The overall result produces very strong results.