Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PC Plus loyalty program

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. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:03, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

PC Plus loyalty program[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unjustified page; a loyalty program at a single chain of stores; most of the content is totally general, and not related to the particular topic. no need for merge, already mentioned in article; redirect isn't a useful search term. DGG ( talk ) 23:48, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:12, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:12, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. This article was previously nominated for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The PC Plus™ Program. • Gene93k (talk) 01:14, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The article describes a run-of-the-mill loyalty programme. Any claims it makes to uniqueness, for example "differs from traditional loyalty programs in its use of database technology to learn customers’ buying patterns, and responds by offering them personalized rewards" are commonplace in other markets: in the UK and I'm sure elsewhere. The references demonstrate that it exists but not that it is notable past this firm's own checkouts. AllyD (talk) 06:59, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Absolutely standard rewards programme with no unique content StuartDouglas (talk) 15:54, 16 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Doesn't expand upon Loblaw Companies in a useful way. AdventurousSquirrel (talk) 01:08, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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.