The discussion was here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Fravia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion... A

The discussion was here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Fravia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion... AfDs can be contested by doing a deletion review. In this case, based in the comments in the AfD I assume there wouldn't be an objection to writing a new sourced article. It was probably protected because the same content was being readded, not because the article itself should not be recreated. Note that the outcome of the AfD was not followed; the content does not seem to have been merged into the original article. Creating a paragraph in the article on reverse engineering on the guy seemed to be the original intent.