Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cashfree

Cashfree

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Fails to meet WP:NCORP, specifically WP:CORPDEPTH. Besides the usual PR-announcements, sources are mostly churnalistic in nature, fitting the description at WP:NEWSORGINDIA. The article carries a promotional tone and was created by a WP:SPA. Yuvaank (talk) 10:37, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Companies, and India. Yuvaank (talk) 10:37, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Karnataka-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:51, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per nomination. Most of the sources are press releases and undisclosed sponsored articles. - Ratnahastin (talk) 12:36, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The subject of the article has a lot of mentions because it was raided by the government...along with a bunch of other similar services. While the subject is mentioned in the articles, they do not actually discuss Cashfree, just the raids. I don't see any coverage specifically of "Cashfree." Angryapathy (talk) 16:03, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – The subject does not have enough news coverage. Mysecretgarden (talk) 04:14, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Absence of citations Regardless of the topic, it does not fulfill WP:SIGCOV.. Bakhtar40 (talk) 07:31, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The company clearly meets the WP:NCORP and WP:CORPDEPTH criteria. I understand that there are concerns raised regarding WP:NEWSORGINDIA, which is why I have provided a detailed source assess table below, including proper justification for each source. In this table, I have chosen The Hindu as a primary reliable source because it has covered the company through general news, including substantial negative coverage. If the article has any promotional tone, it can be addressed and rectified accordingly. Regarding the WP:SPA accusation, I kindly request that we focus on discussing this deletion nomination based on its merits rather than making unwarranted assumptions. Such accusations demoralises.

Source assessment table prepared by User:Silkroadster
Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/info-tech/cashfree-payments-to-expand-to-15-18-countries-over-next-2-years/article65491640.ece	Potentially independent because it is written in a reliable news source by a staff writer	WP:THEHINDU	WP:SIGCOV addresses the topic directly and in detail	✔ Yes
https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/money-and-banking/post-pa-licence-cashfree-payments-transaction-volumes-have-increased-by-30/article67980015.ece	Potentially independent because it is written in a reliable news source by a staff writer	WP:THEHINDU	WP:SIGCOV addresses the topic directly and in detail	✔ Yes
https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/companies/cashfree-payments-lays-off-employees-across-functions/article66370477.ece	Potentially independent because news has a negative connotation and is written in a reliable news source by a staff writer.	WP:THEHINDU	WP:SIGCOV addresses the topic directly and in detail	✔ Yes
https://www.reuters.com/world/india/india-financial-crime-agency-searches-razorpay-paytm-cashfree-2022-09-03/	Potentially independent because news has a negative connotation and is written in a reliable news source by a staff writer(s).	WP:REUTERS	This is not trivial coverage, as the reporters emphasized its significance by contacting the company, though the company did not reply to their request for comment.	✔ Yes
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4924965	Potentially independent because its a policy paper jointly published by researchers who are, in turn, funded by two government-funded agencies, as mentioned in a reliable column.	Policy paper jointly published by Economic and Social Research Council and Indian Council of Social Science Research	Significant coverage at following page numbers 32, and 35; addresses the topic directly and in detail.	✔ Yes
https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/money-and-banking/rbi-asks-razorpay-cashfree-payments-to-pause-on-boarding-new-merchants/article66271668.ece	Potentially independent because news has a negative connotation and is written in a reliable news source by a staff writer.	WP:THEHINDU	WP:SIGCOV addresses the topic directly and in detail	✔ Yes
https://books.google.co.in/books?id=RT3rEAAAQBAJ&newbks=0&printsec=frontcover&pg=PA108&dq=%22Cashfree+Payments%22&hl=en&source=newbks_fb&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=%22Cashfree%20Payments%22&f=false / https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-981-99-4326-5_9	Potentially independent; the company mentioned in a book chapter which an academician writes	Published by a renowned book publisher; Springer Nature	WP:SIGCOV; Coverage found at the following page number 108; addresses the topic. However, please note that significant coverage is more than a trivial mention; it does not need to be the main topic of the source material, as seen in this case. Hence, it is added to Further reading MOS:FURTHER	✔ Yes
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

Silkroadster (talk) 06:09, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is not an accusation or assumption. You have made very few significant edits outside this topic, which effectively makes you a Wikipedia:Single-purpose account (SPA). I encourage you to contribute to other pages as well to avoid appearing as an SPA. More importantly, your source analysis is incorrect. Check my assessment of these sources below. Yuvaank (talk) 10:36, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

When someone begins editing Wikipedia, they usually work on just one page. Instead of doubting them ASPERSION, it’s better to be more understanding. That said, I have reviewed your source assessment and, to some extent, I agree with you. To overcome it, I have added an another source analysis table. Silkroadster (talk) 12:39, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Source assessment table prepared by User:Yuvaank
Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/info-tech/cashfree-payments-to-expand-to-15-18-countries-over-next-2-years/article65491640.ece	Primarily based on direct quotes and paraphrases from the company's CEO	WP:THEHINDU	Fails WP:SIGCOV, lacks independent editorial content, just repeats what the CEO says	✘ No
https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/money-and-banking/post-pa-licence-cashfree-payments-transaction-volumes-have-increased-by-30/article67980015.ece	Primarily based on direct quotes and paraphrases from the company's CEO	WP:THEHINDU	Fails WP:SIGCOV, lacks independent editorial content, just repeats what the CEO says	✘ No
https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/companies/cashfree-payments-lays-off-employees-across-functions/article66370477.ece	Primarily based on direct quotes and paraphrases from an unidentified source	WP:THEHINDU	WP:ROUTINE announcement with a grand total of just 90 words.	✘ No
https://www.reuters.com/world/india/india-financial-crime-agency-searches-razorpay-paytm-cashfree-2022-09-03/	Primarily based on the Enforcement Directorate's statements	WP:REUTERS	WP:ROUTINE announcement of regulatory action that does not establish the company's notability. Besides, the company is only barely mentioned in this article.	✘ No
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4924965	Potentially independent	Policy paper jointly published by Economic and Social Research Council and Indian Council of Social Science Research	Potentially passes WP:SIGCOV, I'll let this one slide although the puffery in Page 35 raises some concerns.	✔ Yes
https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/money-and-banking/rbi-asks-razorpay-cashfree-payments-to-pause-on-boarding-new-merchants/article66271668.ece	~ Largely based on direct quotes and paraphrases from unidentified sources	WP:THEHINDU	WP:ROUTINE announcement of regulatory action that does not establish the company's notability. Besides, the company is only barely mentioned in this article.	✘ No
https://books.google.co.in/books?id=RT3rEAAAQBAJ&newbks=0&printsec=frontcover&pg=PA108&dq=%22Cashfree+Payments%22&hl=en&source=newbks_fb&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=%22Cashfree%20Payments%22&f=false / https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-981-99-4326-5_9	Independent material	Written by two seemingly reliable authors and published by Springer Nature	Fails WP:SIGCOV, Page 108 includes two sentences about regulatory action involving this and another company. No in-depth coverage on this company itself.	✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

Keep: Although... I am a deletionist, I support keeping this page because the source analysis table meets the SIRS criteria. But, if the page-creating editor is found to be evading a block or anything like that, it could be easily nominated for deletion under G5. I assume this because the page has an alternate history. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 13:43, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody has accused the page creator of being a block evader. My nomination is based solely on the quality of the sources used, and I have provided a detailed rebuttal of the source analysis table above. I was also unaware of the previously unsuccessful attempts to create a page for this company at Cashfree Payments, Cashfree, Draft:Cashfree and Draft:Cashfree Payments. Thanks for pointing this out. Yuvaank (talk) 10:49, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - The creator's source assessment depends largely on The Hindu which has a poor reputation for fact checking[1][2]. - Ratnahastin (talk) 11:44, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That's why HINDU says its' opinion pieces should be handled according to the appropriate guidelines. I have used clear news reports, following the RSP qualification criteria for The Hindu. No source is perfect; their coverage often has some bias. Sometimes they even apologise and retract. For example, check out the List of The New York Times controversies. Despite these controversies, have we ever banned the NYT from being considered a reliable source? You have a strong editing history, and I was hoping for better arguments from you so I can learn as a new editor. Silkroadster (talk) 12:55, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I am adding another source analysis table;

Source assessment table prepared by User:Silkroadster
Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://www.researchandmarkets.com/reports/5865944/payment-gateway-global-market-report	It is a secondary symbolic source, potentially independent because it is a market research report.	Market research reports are designed to provide neutral and data-driven insights into industries, markets, and trends, with the majority of their revenue model focused on selling the same report to various clients.	WP:SIGCOV Cashfree is one of the companies featured in the report, with additional details provided in the introductory brief.	✔ Yes
https://jmflresearch.com/JMnew/JMCRM/analystreports/pdf/%5BJMFL%5D%20India%20Internet_Digital%20Payments_SectorUpdate_06Nov2019.pdf	It is a secondary symbolic source, potentially independent because it is a market research report.	Market research reports are designed to provide neutral and data-driven insights into industries, markets, and trends, with the majority of their revenue model focused on selling the same report to various clients.	WP:SIGCOV Coverage found at page number 50.	✔ Yes
https://www.asdreports.com/market-research-companies-651138/open-banking-global-forecast	It is a secondary symbolic source, potentially independent because it is a market research report.	Market research reports are designed to provide neutral and data-driven insights into industries, markets, and trends, with the majority of their revenue model focused on selling the same report to various clients.	WP:SIGCOV Cashfree is one of the companies featured in the report, with additional details provided in the introductory brief.	✔ Yes
https://www.giiresearch.com/report/ires1618785-open-banking-market-by-services-banking-capital.html?	It is a secondary symbolic source, potentially independent because it is a market research report.	Market research reports are designed to provide neutral and data-driven insights into industries, markets, and trends, with the majority of their revenue model focused on selling the same report to various clients.	WP:SIGCOV Cashfree is one of the companies featured in the report, with additional details provided in the introductory brief.	✔ Yes
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

Silkroadster (talk) 12:35, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]