Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Boucher Institute of Naturopathic Medicine (2nd nomination)


 * 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. –  Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 01:38, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Boucher Institute of Naturopathic Medicine
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No outside sources. It was kept in the past, despite this, because it is technically a school that exists. But there's still no secondary sources three years latter. Karlpoppery (talk) 03:13, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Health and fitness-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 03:43, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 03:43, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 03:43, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of British Columbia-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 03:43, 15 April 2017 (UTC)


 * delete Wikipedia is not a directory, and these "it exists so we should have an article on it" arguments are terrible. Fails GNG. Jytdog (talk) 16:51, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. Lacks independent coverage in reliable sources. This is a contemporary school in a Canada. That we can't find sources on-line is strong evidence that such sources don't exist, and that the school is therefore not notable. Pburka (talk) 19:23, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete No evidence of notability. Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 10:51, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete per Pburka. If we can't find the sources to demonstrate notability for a school in Canada, it is highly unlikely that the sources exist at all. TonyBallioni (talk) 18:35, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete - No significant reliable coverage. CAPTAIN RAJU  (✉)   20:42, 22 April 2017 (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.