 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
There was a recommendation made to merge ‘return fraud’ with ‘returning’ on the site. However, return fraud is a huge problem, with retailers losing an estimated $11.8 to $15.5 billion per year and major associations tracking this issue like National Retail Federation, Loss Prevention Research Council, etc. The goal of posting the ‘return fraud’ entry was to educate the public specifically about the severity of the return fraud/abuse problem, and merging the two entries diminishes the importance of this major issue. It is much more complex and sophisticated today, as fraudsters continue to develop technologies and organized crime rings to commit fraud, and commonly use methods that may appear legitimate in order to deceive retailers. With the goal of education, I hope we can keep the two entries separate if possible, and welcome the input of the ‘returning’ poster. I greatly appreciate your consideration. Thank you. Bpq ( talk) 22:26, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Can't say I'm an expert on the matter, but a lot of this article doesn't seem to apply, for instance, in the UK: 1 — Joseph Roe Tk• Cb, 18:14, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
Previously this article was named "returning". I just named it to "product return". I did this because the disambiguation page lists other articles named "return", and I wanted this one to have a title which was more distinguished. Also, I wanted to set up a category for this and similar articles, and I thought that Category:Product return would be an appropriate name for including the articles which I thought should be in a group together. Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:21, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
|
| This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
There was a recommendation made to merge ‘return fraud’ with ‘returning’ on the site. However, return fraud is a huge problem, with retailers losing an estimated $11.8 to $15.5 billion per year and major associations tracking this issue like National Retail Federation, Loss Prevention Research Council, etc. The goal of posting the ‘return fraud’ entry was to educate the public specifically about the severity of the return fraud/abuse problem, and merging the two entries diminishes the importance of this major issue. It is much more complex and sophisticated today, as fraudsters continue to develop technologies and organized crime rings to commit fraud, and commonly use methods that may appear legitimate in order to deceive retailers. With the goal of education, I hope we can keep the two entries separate if possible, and welcome the input of the ‘returning’ poster. I greatly appreciate your consideration. Thank you. Bpq ( talk) 22:26, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Can't say I'm an expert on the matter, but a lot of this article doesn't seem to apply, for instance, in the UK: 1 — Joseph Roe Tk• Cb, 18:14, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
Previously this article was named "returning". I just named it to "product return". I did this because the disambiguation page lists other articles named "return", and I wanted this one to have a title which was more distinguished. Also, I wanted to set up a category for this and similar articles, and I thought that Category:Product return would be an appropriate name for including the articles which I thought should be in a group together. Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:21, 9 May 2017 (UTC)