User talk:FJArnett

Starslip Crisis deletion nomination
The AfD notice you posted on Starslip Crisis links to the previous deletion debate which is the one that has been declared invalid. If you want to start a new debate, please create a new AfD page, call it "Starslip Crisis (second nomination)" or something like that, and link to the new page instead. Thank you. Newyorkbrad 03:28, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Fixed. Thanks for pointing it out, though. -FJArnett 03:30, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, it seems to be in good order now.
 * I saw your comments on an external site. I'm sorry that the Wikipedia "deletion process" is not as user-friendly as one might want it to be. Frankly, I've been editing regularly for months now and it's still not the easiest part of the site to understand, though part of that may be inherent in the way we try to seek consensus for things we do.
 * I'm also sorry that the outcome of the prior deletion discussion has disaffected you from Wikipedia as a whole. Our systems are generally based on the assumption of good faith and on people offering their genuine viewpoints, and once in awhile the system gets fooled. I enjoy my time and value my contributions here, but no one claims that our processes and content are perfect. Suggestions (from you and others) on how we could do better could be more useful than either teasing us or giving up.
 * I'm assuming that you genuinely believe this article ought to be deleted, and aren't just embarking on another venture in point-proving. Newyorkbrad 03:45, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes. As I said, valid points WERE raised before, which should be acted upon. Had I wanted to prove a point, I'd have done so with more dramatics (which, admittedly, is a failing of mine).
 * And it's okay... the fact that other articles I'm viewing are being discussed more rationally right now are helping to restore the faith in the potential. Thank you for the kind words, though. -FJArnett 08:14, 16 February 2007 (UTC)