I've deleted the thread you created on TheUltraman's wall. Feel free to create another similar thread, but without the unnecessarily inflammatory title and excessive usage of caps/exclamation points/question marks. Even though I do not agree that you should have been blocked for a month for what you did (assuming that this is about your block from several months ago, I'm not so sure you should have been blocked at all), demanding an explanation in the way that you did is not particularly helpful, and could have even led to another block due to this wiki's policy against personal attacks.
Also your block ended October 16, 2013. You where never blocked after that so complaining about a topic that happened months ago AND I believe was already resolved with you on a message wall is un-needed.
Airstrikerable was indeed blocked for a month in September for adding false information (which I also believe was an unreasonably long amount of time for this type of situation, and no warning on the talk page was given for this block, which did not require urgent attention). Also, threads of this nature should not be deleted, as it wasn't an obvious troll page (although the wording could have been made less disruptive, it was a legitimate question that was unnecessarily removed). Just because the wording wasn't kind doesn't mean that it should be removed. In addition, saying "I hate you" is not a personal attack, as hating someone doesn't personally insult them (assuming this was what you were talking about when you mentioned personal attack).
I agree that threads containing legitimate questions should not be deleted. To this end, I would have agreed that the thread in question should also not have been deleted...if it had been made back in mid-October, when Airstrikerable's block first expired. Thing is, a thread on this topic was created back then. Considering how Airstrikerable stopped responding to that thread after a while and went about editing the wiki normally, anyone could be forgiven for thinking that he a) felt that he had received a satisfactory answer regarding why he was blocked or b) just decided to drop the issue. With all of that in mind (in addition to the wording of the title and the fact that Airstrikerable's first edit in a month and a half is bringing up a months-old block), it becomes much more difficult to make a case for his intentions actually being to ask a legitimate question here. I believe I made the right call in deleting that thread. As I mentioned in the OP of this thread, he's free to ask again without some of the factors which led me to this conclusion (even if I believe that the issue should not have been brought up again in the first place).
(Re on the bit about personal attacks: the title of the thread being "I hate you" was undoubtedly directed at the person rather than the action, and it seemed unlikely that its intentions were constructive. Considering how the policy page in question doesn't limit itself to prohibiting direct insults, I felt that this case could easily be interpreted as a violation of the policy.)
Regardless of the language used, or whether he'd asked the question already, the post still was asking a legitimate question, and did not qualify as a troll post. The proper response is to respond to him (or link to the thread he already made and point out the reasons why he was blocked), not to delete it without showing him the thread he made earlier.
Saying "I hate you" doesn't deride anything in particular about the person it's directed at, and it's not prohibited for someone to show dislike for someone else. Saying "I hate you" would not be a personal attack, but saying something like "You're a jerk" definitely would. Criticizing someone also is not a personal attack as long as it avoids using language like "You're a jerk".
Hmm, missed responding to this one earlier for some reason. Sorry 'bout the delay.
(Note that I'm not speaking generally here: I agree with your points in principle, but I just don't think that they apply in this specific case.)
I already explained why I did not think that that thread was intended as a legitimate question (and thus why I took it as pure disruption, why I deleted it, etc.). However, I do agree that it was a mistake on my part to not at least link Airstrikerable to the thread which he created back when the incident was still fresh to show him that his question had already been answered. I apologize for not doing this.
I understand that there are some times where expressing dislike for another user is reasonable (eg. if Airstrikerable had announced that he was leaving this wiki and cited hating Ultraman as a reason, then that wouldn't really be a problem). I also understand that "I hate you" is not really a direct insult. However, I don't believe that direct insults are all that SP:NPA was meant to prohibit. In particular, the statement under "What is considered a personal attack?" which reads, "Editors should be civil when stating disagreements. Comments should not be personalized and should be directed at content and actions rather than people." indicates to me that personalizing most issues in that way and to that extent is, if not strictly (ie. to the extent that it is worth a block) forbidden, at least highly discouraged. In the hypothetical situation I described above, not liking Ultraman would be a reason for a choice; in reality, Airstrikerable brought up an administrative decision in the thread in question, but titled it in such a way that it was directed at Ultraman himself rather than Ultraman's decision. As such, I interpreted it as a violation of the policy and warned Airstrikerable accordingly.
Thinking about it now, I would agree that in this situation, what Airstrikerable said could count as a personal attack and disruption. However, the phrase was directed at the action Ultraman did (blocking him). I would agree that the discussion could have been resolved better, and in the future, we should not call out people for personal attacks by saying things like "I hate you".