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 barts a 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 mainspace edits before november 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 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 mainspace edits not and some of those have been made since nov st th 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 not november my mistake it is november 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rather strong position on this my error regarding the date aside it's pretty black and white sincerely skomorokh i have withdrawn my self nomination but i believe that the lack of nominees this time around is due to unfriendly messages such as above i hope that i will have enough edits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 commentbarts a 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 barts a 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