Marc's answer is very good, and very accurate, but here's the official blow-by-blow (having been the mod to delete your answer):
Your answer was flagged with a custom mod message. Without going into the details of the message, it indicated that you had copied code from another answer.
So I took a look at your answer. While I can't tell exactly whether or not you copied/intended to copy the code, the code that was in your answer fully encompassed the code that was in the other answer that was referenced.
Granted, this could have been serendipity, you might not have looked at your question and answers before posted your answer, but without knowing that information, this is the best we have to go on. Your code is a copy (with additions) of the other answer, and it was posted a full day after the first answer was posted.
That in itself usually isn't enough, but there's more.
Moving on, your answer as it was viewed at the time was comprised completely of code (ok, there was the statement of "This does it:" but that's not really of value). While this might have been the case, this very much puts it in the "Very Low Quality" category. Just like link-only answers are not really answers, code snippets which have no context around them (or in them in the form of code comments) have just as little context. People looking at that answer still have to work to understand what fixed it.
The original answer referenced, however, did provide that context, talking about the how (left and right padding, along with a code sample) as well as an added little bonus of why density independent pixels were being used.
Finally, the code was copied (again, could be serendipity, but that is not what seemed to be the case) and proper attribution was not given, as is required by the CC-wiki license.
So, given all of these things:
- Fairly apparent copying of existing answer
- Lack of context around the answer
- Lack of attribution for point 1
- No loss of value/content because of point 1
Your answer was deleted.
That said, the current revision of your answer is an improvement on the prior revisions, but I'd recommend that you work on distinguishing your answer from the (now) accepted answer, as it seems your solution is focused more on the nested
LinearLayout element. Doing so would help detract flags from other users that see the answer in the future.
Additionally, if the accepted answer really did help you and you used that as a basis, you should attribute that answer properly in yours, by providing a link to it and indicating it that it was a basis.