"I have closed that MfD as delete, that being the overall sense of the debate; but would you object to the page being userfied to Piotrus, as several contributors suggested?   
I would not object to this. Go right ahead!   
Done, thanks.   

 ArbCom elections 

Ciao, barts1a. I noticed you've made steps towards standing as a candidate in this year's ArbCom elections. Unfortunately, it does not look as if you meet the eligibilty criteria of having made 1,000 mainspace edits before November 114, 2010 so you will not be able to submit a candidacy (please correct me if I am wrong). Regards, Skomorokh 
I intend to run as this shows I have over 1,700 edits; more than qualifying me to stand for the position and at any rate this election needs all the candidates it can get.   
That link indicates you have 728 mainspace edits, not 1000 (and some of those 728 have been made since Nov 1st14th). Sorry, Skomorokh 
Either way I intend to run anyway. And if you look at the guideline for edits you will see that it actually says November 14, not November 1.   
My mistake, it is November 14 as you say. However, you still do not meet the threshold for article space edits and so are prohibited from running. Sincerely, Skomorokh 
You seem to have a rather strong position on this...   
My error regarding the date aside, it's pretty black and white. Sincerely, Skomorokh 
I have withdrawn my self-nomination, but I believe that the lack of nominees this time around is due to unfriendly messages such as above. I hope that I will have enough edits next time around to qualify.   
I apologise if you found my messages unfriendly, that was very much not my intention. You have the misfortune of being the first ineligible candidate this year, so I do not think this can be attributed as the reason for the lack of nominations. Best, Skomorokh 
CommentBarts1a, the requirement is for mainspace edits (not total edits). You don't appear to meet the requirement.  
No wonder candidates are so few and far between...   
There are many thousands of wikipedians who easily exceed those requirements, and while I don't know if the minimum requirements are the same as last year, I suspect that all the successful and most of the unsuccessful candidates in previous years had rather more than a thousand mainspace edits. Any explanation for the paucity of candidates would need to explain why fewer of the qualified candidates are standing. ''SpielChequers'' 
Too much paperwork (Mostly one editor's fault) and a week filled with people saying nasty things about you?  For most of us, RfA was enough, and I leaned my lesson last year.  

Barts1a, I'm not sure why you've requested comment on this. It is a black and white standard. I don't know the reason behind it, but I would guess it is to ensure that only Wikipedia contributors that have a certain level of experience and dedication to the project are allowed to run in the ArbCom elections. Of course, counting