Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mobile phone cashback


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Missvain (talk) 23:12, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

Mobile phone cashback

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Seems to be some type of marketing scheme for cell phones. I find no evidence that it is widespread enough to have an article. A search reveals very few sources. Rusf10 (talk) 23:05, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finance-related deletion discussions. Rusf10 (talk) 23:05, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Advertising-related deletion discussions. Rusf10 (talk) 23:05, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Rusf10 (talk) 23:05, 16 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete The main rebate page covers the concept fairly thoroughly (and includes the consumer's perspective, which makes this article feel like a salesperson manual.) No sources elaborate on why a monthly, delayed cashback system is a truly distinct service- or why it need only apply to mobile phones. Aaaaaand I just looked at the article as it was originally made: a diff. Cheers, Estheim (talk) 02:18, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep, independently notable and passes WP:GNG, many sources available.

SailingInABathTub (talk) 13:11, 17 April 2021 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 21:44, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete As per nom, Lacks indepth sources, kind of WP:HOAX. Frigidpolarbear (talk) 14:42, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete as I don't believe this passes WP:GNG. References 2 and 5 that SailingInABathtub provided read like ads instead of articles, and would likely fail WP:GNG. They don't mention "mobile phone cashback" except in passing. References 3 and 4 don't talk about mobile phone cashback specifically, 3 just talks about comparing deals and mentions mobile phone cashback in passing, and 4 talks about claiming cashback in general, not mobile phone cashback. References 1 and 6 could be reliable sources, but the website for reference 1 has a homepage with a lot of clickbaity, Daily Mail-esque headlines, so I'm not too sure about its reliability. I was unable to find any sources that objectively talked about mobile phone cashback, only advertising, and some "Offer Details" pages on mobile phone stores. All in all, the 2 articles mentioned by SailingInABathtub wouldn't qualify as significant coverage, failing WP:GNG. HoneycrispApples (talk) 18:27, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Here is another one, without ads Mobile Phone Cashback Deals Explained SailingInABathTub (talk) 09:01, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for providing this source. I think this probably counts as a reliable source, per WP:RS, but I'm not sure if the three sources discussed here would count as "significant coverage". I know that local and regional coverage can still be significant, but the sources that we have here are essentially two news articles on mobile phone cashback, only one of which reports on something instead of explaining how mobile phone cashback works, and a blog post which also explains how phone cashback works. This could be enough to pass WP:GNG, but there's still something we need to address: Is the concept of "mobile phone cashback" significant enough to have its own Wikipedia page? As one editor already said, the main Rebate (marketing) article covers this fairly thoroughly,and mobile phone cashback is essentially just a rebate with some additional terms. Merging this article into the rebate one could violate WP:UNDUE as we'd be giving mobile phone cashback undue weight, which is why I'm still leaning towards deletion for now. HoneycrispApples (talk) 19:02, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep based on sources provided by SailingInABathTub. Article needs improvement and sources added. Maybe I will do that. Webmaster862 (talk) 05:26, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kichu🐘 Need any help? 12:44, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete (or redirect for now to Rebate (marketing) or a similar target) for largely the same reasons as HoneycrispApples. Many articles in this space are promotional churnalism. Sources that mention this concept are non-independent (e.g. the PCMag article cited above has directly on it "we may earn affiliate commissions from buying links on this page") and/or do so peripherally (trivial coverage). On the latter point: merely that a concept exists and is mentioned in articles does not make it a notable topic (especially given that the broader rebate topic is already covered); after all, we don't have an article on paying for a cell phone using a credit card, even though I'm sure it has the same level of "coverage" as rebates when purchasing cell phones. Best, KevinL ( aka L235 · t · c) 10:52, 10 May 2021 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.