Deletion of Dr Zhongjun Cao

Comment: to Murder of Dr Zhongjun Cao. Yeah, with the current article name this is a BLP1E case, but that problem would be easily cured by a move to a different title. The real question is if the underlying event (the murder, the trials and subsequent political fallout) is sufficiently notable and whether it gets over the #NEWS bar. It seems to me that in this case the answer to the last question is "yes", even if not overwhelmingly so. There has been a fair amount of newscoverage of the case in the Australian national (and not just local) media, as a googlenews search shows. Moreover, crucially, this coverage was not limited to the time of the murder but extended over a significant period of time afterwards: from some articles in January 2008 (e.g. http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2008/01/26/1201157739191.htmlhttp://www.starnewsgroup.com.au/story/54130http://news.smh.com.au/police-identify-attack-victim/20080124-1nys.html) and through 2009 (e.g. http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,27574,24995765-2862,00.htmlhttp://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,25921041-2862,00.htmlhttp://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,25902095-2862,00.htmlhttp://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,23153658-2862,00.html).  There has also been some international coverage, in India (e.g.http://www.indianexpress.com/news/mistaken-for-an-indian-chinese-killed-in-au/495793/) and, apparently, in China. Overall seems enough to me to overcome the #NEWS bar. The article needs some clean-up though
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT||WP:NOT)

Comment: to Racial violence in Australia. This subject does seem to be sufficiently notable to be worth covering, but at the moment there isn't much to say about it, and it may be better covered as a subsection of a longer, more general article.  possibly also comes into play here
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO1E)