take a look at the response you got verbal all you had to do was look at my evidence section at the time you posted that it was not long and this page was cited from that section the editors who responded to you could have told you that instead they responded with irrelevancies which was most of what was posted in that case who was responsible for notifying you you already saw what was posted and it had you say inaccuracies since it was a draft and requested corrections why didn't you simply respond as requested at least pointing them out now you want to blame who for not notifying you yes i sympathize that case became a monster but only because hosts of editors including yourself came in with irrelevancies edit conflict what a waste of time verbal templated me on my talk page about this speedy i responded there please look for it if you need to see it and above it was a discussion of his request where i agreed to blank the page however when a page is created for and is cited in an rfar it is part of the rfar unless arbcomm decides otherwise verbal saw this page then this can be assumed from his following of the case and his comment in it he had ample opportunity to correct errors and this was actively requested on the case evidence page another more general case page also created in my user space was mfd'd see verbal's request on my talk it was kept no way should this page be speedied and if it is there will be drv based on the precedent which will of course cause the page to be read by many as it is now only a very small number of people will read it blanked it won't show up in searches so what is this about