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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 18:24, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Bureau of Investigative Reporting[edit]

The Bureau of Investigative Reporting (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

this fails basic WP:GNG. two cited sources in The News are not independent of the subject. they are done by the founder of this organization so I wouldn't cite them here. the URL of this org is not working (http://thebureaureports.com/). There is some coverage on the "The Bureau of Investigative Reporting" but it is a case of namesake and they belongs to a different UK based organisation - Bureau of Investigative Journalism (thebureauinvestigates.com). Saqib (talk) 07:09, 17 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:13, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:13, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:13, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:13, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
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.