Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Boucher Institute of Naturopathic Medicine


 * 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 Keep.  (non-admin closure).Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 11:26, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article provides no references that support the notability of this organization beyond it's listing in a directory of alt-med practices. Salimfadhley (talk) 22:37, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions.  Jinkinson   talk to me  23:36, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of British Columbia-related deletion discussions.  Jinkinson   talk to me  23:37, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:14, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete. The article doesn't have any verifiable sources that demonstrate notability, and after doing a cursory search for sources on online news websites, there probably are none. Clearly fails WP:GNG because there aren't even any sources to assess the reliability of. Karzelek (talk) 23:16, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

Delete: Insufficient coverage in reliable independent secondary sources. The "accrediting association" mentioned above is a sham fringe group of dubious notability itself, and does not lend any notability to the subject. The Princeton review mention is not independent, but written by the school itself. Other mentions are trivial, and added together amount to far too little to meet any of our notability guidelines. My own search turned up nothing significant. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 04:30, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:NSCHOOL. I am unable to find substantial coverage of the school, but there are enough trivial mentions in reliable sources to show that it is a legitimate post-grad professional school on par with the optometry equivalent of Southern California College of Optometry. It appears to be one of seven schools accredited by the Council on Naturopathic Medical Education which is recognized as an accrediting body by various states and provinces that license the practice of naturopathy (e.g., ). This is also confirmed by trivial mentions in various academic sources (e.g. , , ) and national, state, or provincial professional associations that might not be considered "independent of the subject" (e.g. , , ). Listing with Association of Accredited Naturopathic Medical Colleges ; other professions have similar associations that would be considered reliable sources. I also found non-trivial coverage in The Best 168 Medical Schools by The Princeton Review (pp. 386-387), but it appears to be an entry submitted by the school. Location (talk) 03:23, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I can't speak for the notability of the CNME, but it does appear to be an authentic accreditation agency: "CNME is recognized by the U.S. Secretary of Education as the national accrediting agency for programs leading to Doctor of Naturopathic Medicine (ND or NMD) or Doctor of Naturopathy (ND) degrees." Sure enough, it's listed on the US Department of Education's website. Location (talk) 06:17, 17 August 2014 (UTC)


 * 'Keep it's a real school, giving courses leading to a real degree. The only reason for deleting it is an objection to the subject that it teaches. (As it happens, I share the view that what it teaches is fringe science at best, and I wish very much its degrees were not accredited and did not lead to a license to practice. Unfortunately, it's otherwise.  WP presents the real world, not the world as some of us would like it. )  DGG ( talk ) 05:55, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Guerillero  &#124;  My Talk  03:48, 21 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep, I'm in agreement with DGG's post at 05:55, 20 August 2014. I've had a brief look and have seen enough to satisfy me that it's a Quote: real school, giving courses leading to a real degree. and yes, Quote:  The only reason for deleting it is an objection to the subject that it teaches.  Schools are schools and degrees are degrees. Some may refuse to recognise these degrees whilst many others accept them readily and they're also a requirement in certain professions. Good Strong Keep here. (Boss Reality (talk) 08:59, 22 August 2014 (UTC))
 * Keep. It's undersourced but the place exists and I think it is notable enough, whatever reservations I have about the quality of the article in its current state. Libby norman (talk) 09:19, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Withdraw as per DGG's comments. --Salimfadhley (talk) 10:35, 22 August 2014 (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.