Question deleted for a Code of Conduct violation. Which provision, and can it be reviewed?

Henrik Pedersen 20 Reputation points
2026-09-04T17:52:53.7033333+00:00

A question I posted on 27 August 2026 has been deleted for violating the Code of Conduct. The notice says content is either manually reported or identified through automated detection.

The question was a technical report about the Microsoft for Startups Founders Hub portal redirecting to the Azure portal with no verification form reachable. It described the routes I had tested, quoted the responses I had received from Azure support on my own case, and asked how to get the issue looked at. It contained no personal data belonging to anyone else, no credentials, no promotional content and no abuse.

Two questions:

  1. Which provision of the Code of Conduct was the content found to have violated? The deletion notice does not say, and I would like to avoid repeating whatever the problem was.
  2. Is there a process for requesting review of a deletion? The moderation documentation describes the moderator workflow but does not describe how a user contests a decision.

One thing I would like to rule out. My post included a Microsoft support case ID, which is a sixteen-digit number. When I entered that same number into the Azure support request form, the form warned me that it looked like a credit card number. If automated detection made the same inference here, that would explain the deletion, and I would simply omit the case ID when reposting.

I am not looking to re-litigate anything. I would like to know what to change so that a legitimate technical report stays up.

Community Center | Discuss the Q&A site | Other feedback
0 comments No comments

Answer accepted by question author
Dumba_M3 7,375 Reputation points Volunteer Moderator
2026-09-04T20:02:04.1+00:00

Hello.

I undeleted your other question in Azure. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/answers/questions/5987232/founders-hub-sign-in-redirects-to-azure-portal-wit

That and this here were system deleted. It might be the 16 digit number, no specifications were recorded.

You may bump the other thread to attract attention to it.

Thanks,

Stefan

Was this answer helpful?

1 person found this answer helpful.

0 additional answers

Sort by: Most helpful

Your answer

Answers can be marked as 'Accepted' by the question author and 'Recommended' by moderators, which helps users know the answer solved the author's problem.