Sad that some editors jumped to conclusions without reading or analyzing the article or using the proper AfD process, but I recognize that there is a lot of emotion these days. It took over an hour to build the article but seconds were spent to kill it.

First I carefully reviewed (again) the BLP policies so I could carefully follow them. Than I used the Article Creation Template (or whatever its called) with it's step by step questions. The result of those questions was to create the article. I also check that there are no conflicting articles.  The less than ideal article name is because there is a completely unrelated http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misha (an Russian Olympic mascot, not a person). When a last name is known, obviously the article would be renamed.

Next I did not just paste in some news report. I stitched together various reports in a logical topical arrangement using unique language plus direct quotes from involved people. 

I created it from a variety of sources (over 7 different ones anyway) and ref'd the heck out every statement per BPL which says "We must get the article right. Be very firm about the use of high-quality sources. All quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be explicitly attributed to a reliable, published source, which is usually done with an inline citation. Contentious material about living persons (or in some cases, recently deceased) that is unsourced or poorly sourced – whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable – should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion.". Before saying this is a BLP violation please show which statements were not reliably sourced to published sources with inline citations.

I did ref the Daily Mail (admit not the very best source at times) sometimes because they were pulling info from various places and some of it was a little different than other sources so I wanted to reflect both versions where info seemed to conflict. However, the most comprehensive source I've found so far is an AP article. http://bigstory.ap.org/article/bomb-suspect-influenced-mysterious-radical There are more than 1.1 million hits on Google for "Boston Marathon Misha" as I write so an argument that this person is not WELLKNOWN is debatable. 

The article is not strictly negative. It states reported bio info (granted there is limited info to report). Mostly it summarizes a real debate through the media between various family members (mainly the Maryland uncle and a former husband of a sister) who cite Misha as the driving force behind Tam's radicalization and the mother who says he was just a nice guy. The various interviews are easy to find and widely quoted, though I believe the refs were mostly to the original media sources or multiple sources.  

There is some wild speculation about this guy by the media out there. I specifically excluded any of that from the article. My goal was to write an over referenced, comprehensive, neutral, informative article that accurately pulls together the various media reports so far.  Like many articles, there is room for improvement. The article was redirected (as a sub for a deletion nomination) before anyone even had a chance to properly review it and improve it. 

BLPCRIME may not apply as no one, and certianly not the article, is accusing Misha of a crime.

The absence of a known complete name does not disqualify a person from having a Wikipedia article. Consider DB Copper and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Placeholder_name 
Anyway, considering how many people are searching this guy I expect he will be found and a page will get created or restored.  Cheers,