So, reviewing the deleted posts which I will repost here for transparency, I will summarize why your posts were removed.

I believe that certain amphetamine drugs were used. Something I read referenced giving the drugs to tank crews to keep them awake and alert for 30+ hours.

When a user asks if an event occurred in fact or not, it is not an appropriate answer to say, "I read something somewhere that said something to that effect." Users come to this group to find clear, factual answers, as well as an interpretation of the facts of what occurred. When you are unsure, you are passing along potentially bad information, and even if you are right, to provide an answer that you cannot verify with a source, is basically to say, "I guess, if my memory serves correctly," when it has been proven that human memory is entirely fallible.

I know there were pictures taken of his charred corpse after the dug it up from the Reich Chancellery garden. So maybe it was the last live picture.

How do you know? When you were asked for a source, you failed to provide one. When asked to clarify you changed your phrasing to say, "presumably", indicating that you were not 100% sure.

Heavily trafficked threads or no, throwing out half remembered answers, unsubstantiated claims, and then waffling when pressed to provide support for your assertions is kind of why this sub exists in a way. People take half remembered facts, anecdotes, and poorly reasoned or substantiated opinions and assert them as fact. This is how bad myths about history get spread around and create false understandings of our past. This is why the Founding Fathers are so easily tossed around by opposing political ideologies; someone takes a quote they saw once completely out of context and then repeat it creating a poor interpretation of what they were trying to say and use it to excuse things that are not actually true.

In an academic setting, you are not given credit for "good tries", "almost getting there", or "I kind of think it's this." You know or you don't. You back up your conclusions, and you can state facts clearly, in context, and with an understanding of them in the larger sense.

These moderators were not "justifying their petty internet powers", they were keeping you from passing on bad information, half remembered facts, and providing poor service for what people come to this thread for; factual, accurate, and intelligent answers.

Please understand that people come here because they want an informed response from someone capable of engaging with the sources, and providing follow up information. Providing a vague recollection of "Something I read", or an answer that is nothing more than a blurb from Wikipedia/the first hit on Google doesn't provide the type of answers we want to encourage here, and as such, don't allow that to make up the entirety of a response.

If someone wishes to simply get the Wikipedia answer or the Google answer, they are welcome to look into it for themselves, but posting here is a presumption that they either don't want to get the answer that way, or have already done so and found it lacking.

In the case of those two answers you link to, they weren't "good". They were short, lacked context, sources, and used qualified language - "I believe", "So maybe" - which calls into question just how reliable the information is at all.

If you don't agree with the level of moderation here, you are by no means obligated to frequent this subreddit. /r/AskHistory has much looser standards and might be more to your liking.

For the sake of an actual discussion, let's take a more open approach to this.

These were your two comments:

I believe that certain amphetamine drugs were used. Something I read referenced giving the drugs to tank crews to keep them awake and alert for 30+ hours.

and

I know there were pictures taken of his charred corpse after the dug it up from the Reich Chancellery garden. So maybe it was the last live picture.

Would you say that they stack up against our rules on answers? Have you read this post?

As a moderator who's had nothing to do with either of these decisions, I'll go ahead and pop in to offer an explanation of exactly why your comments were expunged. Because honestly, both of them were bloody poor excuses for comments here. Let's address your concerns first.

Both comments took place on very low-traffic threads which would not have gotten answered otherwise.

That's not an excuse for a poor answer here. In /r/AskHistorians, we hold all top-level comments to the same exacting standard. It doesn't matter if the post is an hour old or a month old - if you make a poor comment, it will most likely be deleted (Unless one of us happens to miss it - we're volunteers, after all, and though we do our best, we aren't perfect). I would go ahead and bring up the actual posts that you made, but your next point covers that one quite well.

In both cases my information was good.

No, it really wasn't. In the first thread (Regarding performance-enhancing drugs), here is your post (verbatim).

I believe that certain amphetamine drugs were used. Something I read referenced giving the drugs to tank crews to keep them awake and alert for 30+ hours.

Not only do we generally delete anything that begins with "I believe" or "something I read once" (both of which are included in your post), due to our rule against speculation, but your answers didn't even come close to what we expect from comments here (see the first link). But! Perhaps your second post that you're complaining about had justification?

Nope. Here it is:

I know there were pictures taken of his charred corpse after the dug it up from the Reich Chancellery garden. So maybe it was the last live picture.

Not only does this not actually answer the question (Which again, is sort of required here, unless you're asking a follow-up), not only was it extremely poor (two sentences with your opinion), but you didn't even provide the picture you were talking about.

Please read the rules on the sidebar and the standards that I linked earlier. If moderation has exceeded either of them (it didn't), please feel free to address those concerns. If not, please feel free to check out /r/history or /r/AskHistory for subreddits with little-to-no moderation.

Good day :)

Both comments took place on very low-traffic threads which would not have gotten answered otherwise.

This is usually a bad assumption to make. I've on occasion posted comments a day after seeing a post (because I'd rather wait and comment when I've had time to sit down for properly and draft a reasonably substantial response, which can take a while because you have to check your references, write out the comment, make sure it's comprehensible and organized, etc) and I know that some people answer even older comments.