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 redirect to Ai Weiwei. Merge can take place using sources in article history  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:09, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Fake Case[edit]

The Fake Case (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)

The website has no significance other than it is a means for its owner to draw attention to his tax dispute with the government. The fact that he has a website does not require a separate article; this can easily be included in the biographical article Ai Weiwei. Senator2029 • talk 20:15, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect per above argument. This really isn't notable outside of Ai Weiwei himself. The artist is notable, but this website is not. This just needs to be redirected.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 10:17, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:08, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:08, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge - Not independently notable of Ai Weiwei. Content best handled by merge. Sven Manguard Wha? 05:00, 27 August 2012 (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.