User talk:The Canadian Roadgeek/Archive 3

; Archives
	By month: November 2006; December 2006; January 2007; February 2007; March 2007; April 2007; May & June 2007; July 2007; August 2007; September 2007; October 2007 - April 2009; By Topic: WP:RfA in January 2007; AfD - Roads in Markham; TfD - Roads templates;

Below is a debate about my first unsuccessful try at the WP:RfA. But don't you worry, Smcafirst is going to try out WP:RfA again in March 2007.

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

→

RfA answer

Thank you for the prompt answer. I would recommend putting this answer on your main RfA page so other people will know as well. (See the other RfAs at WP:RFA to see how this is usually done.) Additionally, I appreciate your enthusiasm in the project and admire your confidence in launching your RfA. However, you are not an extremely experienced editor, and people usually like admins to have a lot of experience and at least several thousand edits. I would suggest withdrawing your RfA and reapplying in the future. The choice is yours, though, and I wish you the best of luck whatever your decision. Let me know if you have any questions. Also, if you begin to visit WP:RFA regularly, you will get a good idea of what RfA participants are usually looking for in a candidate. Also, never forget that adminship is just another set of tools, and being an admin does not reflect the value of an editor's contributions to the encyclopedia. Happy New Year and best wishes for the road ahead, Dar-Ape 23:11, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

RfA

Check out WP:SNOW. Now's probably the time to pull out of the RfA. You have not been here long enough & do not know enough about wikipedia. Stick around, and if you /really/ want to broom cupboard keys, re-apply in another ten months or so. --Tagishsimon (talk)

Edit counts

I never said anything about edit count, but I don't see how one can say they were "active" when their edit history does not show any contributions. I can't just say I was active because I was "thinking" about Wikipedia. -- Renesis (talk) 00:22, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Your request for adminship has been closed

I regret to inform you that your request for adminship has been closed, failing to gain the consensus required to promote you to administrator. Please reapply in a few months, and take on the criticism that other users left for you during your RfA. I hope to see you there again soon. --Deskana (For Great Justice!) 00:38, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

RfA comments

Hello Smcafirst, I expanded my answers to some of the RfA questions in response to feedback. Perhaps you might have time to look at the revised RfA answers? I've actually done a fairly sizable amount of vandalism reversion and the revised answers give more examples. I appreciate your feedback. Thanks, --Shirahadasha 07:41, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: Your RfA

I saw your RfA in the log (though I did not participate in it), and I just wanted to commend you for being such an excellent, committed editor. Please don't be disenfranchised by your first run at adminship- Wikipedia definitely needs more helpful, enthusiastic people like you. Keep doing the work you're doing, and in a few months, I'd bet that you could easily become an administrator. I, for one, would be happy to support you. -- Kicking222 01:29, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

First, friends are good. It's always nice to make a new friend. If you ever need anything Wikipedia-related, just let me know, and I'll do my best to help you out. Second, I would theoretically be willing to nominate you for another RfA run, but I would have to look at your contributions to make sure I would support you first (obviously, I can't nominate someone whom I do not feel would make a good admin). However, if you continue to make strong contributions, I'm sure this will not be a problem. Best wishes! -- Kicking222 21:52, 7 January 2007 (UTC)