Well now that you agree that it's not the right way to do business, I don't mind playing my cards.
The tables are T439C and T439B, but the offending transaction which uses the view on these tables is /isdfps/s_puwnr (a transaction in the layered ISDFPS product.) The view is V_T439C.
If you have a mismatch between the C and B table, i.e. if you have historical text entries in T439B that don't correspond to any entries currently in T439C, then the /isdfps/s_puwnr complains because the V_T439C view is no longer consistent.
And this is total BS - you should never have to delete text entries when you delete their support - for all anyone cares, unsupported text entries can and should be able to stay out there forever, for historical purposes ...