Unfocused: a Wikipedia user who is

1. a semi-professional photographer.
2. showing symptoms of undiagnosed ADD.

With this edit, I think I've officially gone from "Liberal" to "Flaming Liberal". I welcome comments on my talk page.

I had been posting anonymously because I feel it is more in keeping with the nature of Wikipedia: edits stand or fall on their own merits and the quality of the sources cited, rather than on the reputation of the poster.

For a while I posted using my account, but I've found it ultimately far less satisfying and have returned to anonymous editing.

I think I've figured out why some VfD are bothering me.

1. The text of the VfD notice posted on the article page is hostile to new users.
2. Rapid VfD is hostile to new users. New users who put up a simple starting page are being threatened to have their work deleted just as they first see their efforts displayed on screen.
3. VfD is being used as a cleanup tag. I don't have a problem with that per se, but the VfD notice text should be changed if this is a legitimate use.
4. VfD is being used as an "delete and recreate from scratch" decree. VfD should be applied only where an article has NO PLACE in Wikipedia. If a poor article has a place in Wikipedia, it should be cleaned up, or edited down to a bare stub, rather than eliminated. Leaving a stub acknowledges the utility of the article.

Jimbo Wales's comment re: tolerance of trivial articles on VfD This comment is especially relevant to an encyclopedia that never runs out of paper.