Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:StrazhevaFan/K.Silem.Mohammad

 __NOINDEX__
 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was  delete both. JohnCD (talk) 10:42, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

User:StrazhevaFan/K.Silem.Mohammad
Also nominating User:Vermondo/K. Silem Mohammad.

In September 2010, I closed Articles for deletion/K. Silem Mohammad as delete. A few weeks later asked me to restore the article. I declined but offered to userfy. This user never followed up, but apparently made their own copy of the article from an old cache or mirror. Then asked me to userfy the same article, which I did. Neither user has edited since, so now there of two WP:STALEDRAFTs of the same deleted article. Since this is an unsourced BLP, I think six months with no improvements is enough. RL0919 (talk) 04:02, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. -- Klein zach  04:46, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Support RL0919's judgment. Probably, in general, an admin who userfies deleted material should be free to delete it again solely on his own judgment.  If unmodified after undeletion, it could even be a CSD#G7.  I have just tried writing this into Userfication  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 09:38, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
 * On further thought, this is a reasonable interpretation of WP:CSD. "A sufficiently identical and unimproved copy, having any title, of a page deleted via a deletion discussion."  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 22:17, 14 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete-- per above. -- E♴  (talk)  23:41, 8 April 2011 (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 page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.