There definitely seems to be this ongoing argument over the way AfD is handled, or whether or not it is being correct or accurate in its judgements for articles to be deleted. This seems to get dredged up once every, say, three months (along with arguments over RfA standards) and as yet we haven't really done anything very firm about it, except change the name of what seems to me to be a universally hated procedure.
I think we should try to think of either how to fix AfD if it is really as bad as we think, or if it is totally beyond repair replace it with something better. Kim Bruning and I were discussing "pure wiki" forms of deletion some time ago, which involved page blanking, and Kim authored a series of experimental deletion procedures (which I tried out for a few articles) at [[Wikipedia:Experimental deletion]]. Personally I am not so sure this is a great deal better, but it's a start. If anyone can come up with a better process, please do add it to the page.
To those taking issue with AfD deletions - forgive me for being an arsehole, but {{sofixit}}. I think that rather than arguing over the way that AfD operates, we should work towards fixing or replacing it, using these cases where users have taken exception to AfDs as feedback for the current process. Otherwise, we'll just be having this same argument in three months time or so, in a sort of "Groundhog Day" scenario. :-) And we all know how unproductive arguments can be on Wikipedia.
Best regards,
-- Nick, [[User:NicholasTurnbull]]