I understand completely. I wasn't attempting to rebut or argue the point, but to rescue the human effort that went into the specific article. Wikipedia is less run-from-the-top and more just a community with factions. So I'd say some people lean towards deletion and some people lean towards inclusion. The dissonance you are experiencing is from traversing the territory of control of this factional cold war. There is no central authority to say "we are taking the coherent position of 'ensuring no unapproved contributions' to this site".

For my part, I am an occasional contributor with just a little more patience than most, some grandfathered rights, and a philosophical opposition to the erasure of creative effort. And about as much as I care about doing is repairing lost work so I'll try to get your article back because I think it should be there. I have no position of influence in this organization and have no desire to put in the effort to gain it to change it. But it's a commons. And I intend to modify the commons within my existing power.

I think if I had experienced what you had my position would not be different from yours.