Candidate withdrew.
Ok guys. After having a think about things, I believe that many of the opposers in my previous RfA were opposing me simply because of the number of RfAs that I have had in the past. I definitely think that I have solved every single issue that has been brought up in the past. I solved the WP:OWN, WP:BITE, and the canvassing issues in the past, and I have continued to contribute here even after that fact. So what if I have had too many RfAs? I have learned from my mistakes in the past and I have grown into a great contributor here on this site. I recently became a sysop over on the Simple English Wiktionary, and since I have become a sysop there, I have not had any problems with misusing the tools or with following the guidelines too closely. I have logged over 10 blocks, 100+ deletions, 100+ unblocks (for old IP users that needed it), a couple of restores and about 30 or so protects. All of my actions were appropriate and I definitely think that I could bring this attitude over to the Simple English Wikipedia. I hope that you all agree with me and even though I do not have a nominator this time, I believe that I won't need one.
Candidate's acceptance:Self-nomination
Comment Less than four weeks since the last RFA, but I don't think number-counting is too productive in the circumstances. What does concern me is some recently deleted articles Razor tagged for QD (British Royal Family). From what I saw, they were one line EN straight copy-pastes of the first line. While I can see the reason for deletion, the first line of a Simple article is likely to be the same as the first line of the EN equivalent - especially in such topics - and notability is obvious. Would expanding the article, even if only by simplifying that one line and bolding the name of the article in the first paragraph, be more suitable, perhaps? Soup Dish (talk) 02:45, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Withdrawn. This was stupid of me. This is not the thing that I should be doing if I want to become an administrator on this site. *sigh*