This question Where is Gormenghast? has an interesting answer on it. The author of a (paywalled) article that supposedly answers the question has posted to say that their article answers it, but hasn't posted any part of the article, other than the name of the article and an assertion that their article contains the answer.
Where is Gormenghast?
In Peake's imagination.
In an article titled 'Burning the Globe' (Peake Studies, vol.8, #2 (April 2003), pages 12–23), I show how it is possible to situate Gormenghast on the map, but this does not mean that Peake intended his castle to reflect anything but what he imagined.
I flagged it as spam and was told
Flag Declined - The article cites a clear and verifiable source; even if not everyone has access to it, providing source is still useful information
Since the article itself is paywalled, there's no way to find out whether OP's own article does actually contain any useful information without paying for it. So why isn't this spam?
By the same token, if this isn't spam, does that mean I can start putting my answer references behind a paywall (Valorum Studies, vol.8, #2 (April 2020), pages 12–23) in order to earn some extra cash? ;-)