There's nothing to be defensive about, so don't let that worry you. Each OS uses it's own formatting system for the partition on which it resides. The information concerning the traits of the filesystem is stored on superblocks within the file system itself, on ext file systems. In NTFS the information is stored in a Master File Table. When the primary superblock, in an ext file system, or the Master File Table, in an NTFS file system, becomes corrupted, the file system type cannot be determined, and an error message, such as you received, is displayed. Master File Table corruption can happen in a number of ways, but simply installing PCLinuxOS is not one of them. User error is far more likely a suspect, such as an improper shut down, or even accidental errors such as electrical current spikes. That said, Windows has always been known to do strange things within its own file systems, and within it's registry, that cause spontaneous file system errors. That the error occurred at the time of the PCLinuxOS installation, is most likely pure coincidence. It would most likely have happened anyway, without the installation.
Built into the NTFS file system, a log of transactions against its components is maintained, and used by CHKDSK to repair a damaged Master File Table. Whenever a change is made to the partition, or directly to the file system itself that results in the file system being unreadable CHKDSK attempts to rebuild the Master File Table using the information in the transactions log. When you changed the partition size that triggered CHKDSK to run on the next boot. Most likely you could have just run it from the recovery disk, with the same results. Having not shown us the actual partition table before taking the measures you did, There's no real way of knowing what it's actual state was at the time.
The end result was what you desired, so that's good. The reasoning behind your choosing the method you chose is highly suspect, at best. Blaming the PCLinuxOS installation for the problem, with no more than the information you provided, is much like putting 2 plus 2 together and coming up with 22 as your answer; cute, but illogical.