Talk:Narconon

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Narconon article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

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

Archives: 1, 2: 30 days

This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Scientology B‑class Top‑importance

	This article is supported by WikiProject Scientology, a collaborative effort to help develop and improve Wikipedia's coverage of Scientology. The aim is to write neutral and well-referenced articles on Scientology-related topics. See WikiProject Scientology and Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ.ScientologyWikipedia:WikiProject ScientologyTemplate:WikiProject ScientologyScientology articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

California: Los Angeles Unassessed

	California portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	Greater Los Angeles portal This article is supported by Los Angeles area task force.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Alternative medicine B‑class

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative medicine, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Alternative medicine related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Alternative medicineWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative medicineTemplate:WikiProject Alternative medicineAlternative medicine articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Alternative Views B‑class Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative views, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of significant alternative views in every field, from the sciences to the humanities. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion.Alternative ViewsWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative ViewsTemplate:WikiProject Alternative ViewsAlternative Views articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Not Narcotics Anonymous

I think we ought to add a section clarifying the relationship (better, lack of relationship) between Narconon and Narcotics Anonymous. I would do this, but I'm not entirely sure what the major differences and similarities are. Given that many people often (I'm told mistakenly) abbreviate Narcotics Anonymous as Narcanon, and since Narcotics Anonymous is probably the largest organization involved in the same project(getting people off narcotics) as Narconon, it seems to me that there should be a section in the Wikipedia article clarifying how Narconon is or is not related to Narcotics Anonymous. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.23.142.85 (talk) 04:09, 23 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I know exactly what the issues are and will add something this evening. I have worked with Narcotics Anonymous groups before, assisting people who have been swindled by this Scientology fraud. At the same time I'll add information about these crook's methods. Fredric Rice (talk) 15:36, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

BIAS

As someone who came to this page to reseach various claims about the success rate of this program, it is fairly clear that the entire page is heavily biased against Narconon with very little substantive information. I do understand that investigations and overt community actions taken against Scientology may be facts, but objective people would like some information on the actual methods and success rates. Perhaps as an attorney I am used to at least an attempt at hiding bias. Propaganda is more persuasive when you attempt to sound objective. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.254.11.22 (talk) 18:03, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the methods are described here. Perhaps they could go into more detail, but really what is there is a good description of their detoxification methods. As for the success rate, I think the article covers that. Narconon claims a 70% success rate, but no scientific verification has been done. Obviously they aren't going to allow outsiders to come in and review their process or their files and without that how would one independently verify their success rate? I too am an attorney, so I understand your concerns. But you must understand that it is rather difficult with a topic like Narconon that is almost universally recognized as an unconscionable scam outside of Scientology members who try and defend it. I would agree that it could be set up like a regular article, simply discussing the organization's history and methods before delving into some of the controversies, but the article would still end up being about the same. It's just a fact with this organization that there is far more verifiable negatives than positives.Jdlund (talk) 14:45, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Arrowhead, OK

No mention of the Arrowhead Oklahoma facility in the article. This is a fairly large omission.