The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a request for adminship that did not succeed. Please do not modify it.
This was certainly a close one. A number of the oppositional arguments were not properly supported by evidence. Select others opposed solely because they disagreed with the candidate's views on such matters as inclusion. This can be a weak argument, especially if not explained in any great detail. However, the CSD-related concerns were evidently seen to be problematic by a significant portion of the participants, and they swung the consensus (or lack thereof). —Anonymous DissidentTalk07:09, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]