Davina Reichman – SNOW overturn BLP1E is not a speedy criterion, speedy criteria do not apply to an article which has survived an AfD except in cases of newly-found copyright infringement. – Jclemens (talk) 03:34, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The following is an archived debate of the deletion review of the page above. Please do not modify it.
The BLP was not under discussion but appears to have been deleted as a one event BLPIE from comments in the associated afd - I asked the deleting admin but looking at his activity there is no guarantee he will edit in the next days. The admin asserted he deleted it a6s a BLPIE from comments in this associated afd - Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Being Born Again Couture Fashion Show (2nd nomination) - I am not seeing a consensus worthy of deleting the Bio in that discussion - the bio has previously been at AFD in october 2011 and was closed as no consensus - Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Davina Reichman - If the bio is to be deleted it should be at its own AFD. Off2riorob (talk) 22:36, 21 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment regarding an associated deletion - IClothing - The admin also seems to have deleted IClothing in a similar manner - so I am attaching that deletion review here also - I am of the opinion (from memory) that there is not much for an article there but there may well be detail for a merge to the parent BLP if its deletion is overturned here. Off2riorob (talk) 23:22, 21 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment regarding IClothing: at least that was deleted under a CSD criterion (WP:CSD#A7) and had previously been deleted as WP:CSD#G11. It is still cached here where it claims "the world's first iPad compatible clothes". Some might regard this as an indication of importance, others might regard it as bilge water. Perhaps a separate discussion is required. Thincat (talk) 09:13, 22 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Overturn. "If a page has survived a prior deletion discussion, it should not be speedy deleted except for newly discovered copyright violations." There might be limited exceptions to the principle, but this surely doesn't fall into any of them. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 03:00, 22 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I am now finding a whole lot of backstory to all this: here and here. Thincat (talk) 11:10, 22 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
overturn- WP:BLP1E still isn't a speedy deletion criteria. Even if it was, the article was ineligible for speedy deletion anyway (barring newly found copyright issues) since it survived a previous AFD. Umbralcorax (talk) 16:25, 22 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
overturn out of process deletion. Article not eligible for speedy, no applicable speedy criteria in any case. Hobit (talk) 16:46, 22 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This is strange. the deleting admin's last edit was on Oct 23 and his last admin action was on Oct 19 and then on Nov 17 he swoops down out of the sky and deletes Davina Reichman and IClothing and then disappears again. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 05:01, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Their editing seems very sporadic as does their admin actions, so it doesn't look that unusual for the individual at least. --82.19.4.7 (talk) 07:23, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Overturn deletion, BLP1E is not a CSD. JORGENEV 12:59, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Overturn article had survived a previous AfD and so could only be deleted by another AfD. This might be justifiable if the AfD on the fashion show had discussed deleting this article as well, but it didn't (in fact several people commenting at that AfD suggested some of the content could be merged to this article). Hut 8.5 15:19, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Overturn. Advise the deleting admin to read the XfD (which he linked to) and WP:CSD. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 15:45, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I remembered seeing this on IRC. Basically, the deleting admin stated that they are familiar with the subject, who has requested deletion. Logs available by email upon request. T. Canens (talk) 00:12, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I would say the admin should have directed her to otrs to request that. Such a request if verified would not be a reason to delete it as he did. Off2riorob (talk) 00:18, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Overturn. At least we now have a reason for the deleting admin's decision, but in my opinion the subject's request alone is nothing like enough to justify speedy deletion of an article that had already survived an AfD. I'm not convinced by the IClothing A7 either given the number of sources cited. Alzarian16 (talk) 01:42, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above is an archive of the deletion review of the page listed in the heading. Please do not modify it.
