For the reason on my semi retirement please see User:Andrewcrawford

if you-ever want to talk just google wjmdem you will most likly find me somewhere — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wjmdem (talk • contribs) 15:53, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have suggested this to be moved. Please see Talk:Brave Heart#Move?. Simply south...... cooking letters for just 7 years 19:19, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Remember I suggested to you on the Gladiators (1992 series) talk page about how each episode summary should be. Well here is another suggestion! This is the first episode of the second series. the coloured boxes represent the colour of the shirt and the shorts the contender wore. The coloured fonts represent the colour of the line around the contenders shirt and the italic squares on the sides of the contenders shirt and shorts. Underneath the wikitables, in the After ? events, the coloured letters represents the colour of the shirt and the shorts the contender wore and the coloured numbers represent the colour of the line around the contenders shirt and the italic squares on the sides of the contenders shirt and shorts.

Episode 1 - Heat 1

• Original airdate: September 18th, 1993
• Event 1 - Skytrak:Pauline would be chased by Scorpion while Katie would be chased by Lightning. Pauline was first to be caught while Katie was caught a few seconds later and neither scored any points. Richard would be chase by ? while Phil would be chased by ?. In a close race between the contenders, Richard crossed the line first scoring himself ten points with Phil crossing the line second scoring himself five points.
• After 1 event:Pauline 0 - 0 Katie, Richard 10 - 5 Phil
• Event 2 - The Wall:Katie would be chased by Jet while Pauline would be chased by Nightshade. Both Katie and Pauline were pulled off the wall and both scored no points. Phil would be chased by Wolf while Richard would be chased by Cobra. Both Phil and Richard made it up the wall scoring themselves ten points.
• After 2 events:Pauline 0 - 0 Katie, Richard 20 - 15 Phil
• Event 3 - Powerball:Katie was using the blue balls while Pauline was using the red balls. Panther guarded the left basket while Jet guarded the middle basket while Jet guarded the right baskets. Pauline scored the centre basket twice, the bottom left basket, the top right basket and the bottom left basket scoring herself twelve points while Katie scored no points. Richard was using the red balls while Phil was using the blue balls. Shadow was guarding the left baskets while Wolf was guarding the centre basket while Trojan was guarding the right baskets. Phil scored the bottom right basket, the top right basket, the centre basket, the top left basket and the bottom left basket scoring himself eleven points while Richard scored no points.
• After 3 events:Pauline 12 - 0 Katie, Richard 20 - 26 Phil
• Event 4 - Tilt:Pauline took on Falcon. Pauline won both pulls scoring herself ten points. Katie took on Panther. Katie narrowly won the first pull scoring herself five points and stayed on the tilt for the second pull scoring herself two points totalling her score to seven points. Richard took on Hunter. Richard lost the first pull scoring himself no points but won the second pull scoring himself five points. Phil took on Warrior. Phil lost both pulls scoring himself no points
• After 4 events:Pauline 22 - 7 Katie, Richard 25 - 26 Phil
• Event 5 - Hang Tough:Pulling the female contenders down was Scorpion. Pauline hung on in the scoring zone scoring herself five points but Katie was pulled down scoring herself no points. Saracen pulled both Richard and Phil off the rings and kept them from scoring.
• After 5 events:Pauline 27 - 7 Katie, Richard 25 - 26 Phil
• Event 6 - Suspension Bridge:Nightshade knocked Pauline (with two seconds to go until she dropped her hammerhead forfeiting the match) and Katie (in five just five seconds) off the suspension bridge and kept them from scoring. Shadow knocked Richard (in seventeen seconds) and Phil (in eight seconds) off the suspension bridge and kept them from scoring.
• After 6 events:Pauline 27 - 7 Katie, Richard 25 - 26 Phil
• Event 7 - Eliminator:Pauline lead Katie by twenty points giving her a ten second headstart. The closeness between the pair was when Pauline tripped on the platform while getting across the ?. Whilst at the balance beam Katie's right hand touched the balance beam twice and had to go back while Pauline made it across the balance beam without hassle and stormed up the travelator and through to the paper and into the quarter finals. Katie eventually cross the balance beam on the third go, then up the travelator and through the paper. Phil lead Richard by a point points earning him a half a second head start. It was a very close race. Phil lead Richard by a small margin until Phil rocketed up the cargo net but when he came to the travelator, he tripped but used his hand to stay on his feet while Richard made it up the travelator without any harm but used his hand to get up the platform and both made it through the paper at a close time. There was a video replay to see which contender made it through the paper first and it was Phil sending him into the quarter finals.

What do you think? Wonderwizard (talk) 11:32, November 8th 2014 (UTC)

Seems very good to me, i have retired from editing so i wont be able to do it but yeah what your suggesting seems perfect for itAndrewcrawford (talk - contrib) 14:25, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I've just added you to the inactive participants list on the mentioned project above. If you would like to rejoin the project at any point, Just add your name to the list of active participants. Thanks, TF ^{{ Contribs }} 14:12, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

hi, i'd like to see a substantial rewrite at system load. please see my comments at the talk page

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:40, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I see that you commented at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/London_Buses_route_153. You may be interested in commenting at this new Article for Deletion nomination Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/London Buses route 53. Best wishes, jcc (tea and biscuits) 09:21, 26 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! There is currently a request for approval of a bot to manage the AutoWikiBrowser CheckPage by removing inactive users, among other tasks. You are being contacted because you may qualify as an inactive user of AWB. First, if you have any input on the proposed bot task, please feel free to comment at the BRFA. Should the bot task be approved, your access to AWB may be uncontroversially removed if you do not resume editing within a week's time. This is purely for routine maintenance of the CheckPage, and is not indicative of wrongdoing on your part. You will be able regain access at any time by simply requesting it at WP:PERM/AWB. Thank you! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:36, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jungle Junction (series 1) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jungle Junction (series 1) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 13:53, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jungle Junction (series 2) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jungle Junction (series 2) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 13:54, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article Special Agent Oso (series 2) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Appears to fail WP:NTV and WP:GNG.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the ((proposed deletion/dated)) notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing ((proposed deletion/dated)) will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. DonaldD23 talk to me 12:53, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article Special Agent Oso (series 1) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Appears to fail WP:NTV and WP:GNG.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the ((proposed deletion/dated)) notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing ((proposed deletion/dated)) will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. DonaldD23 talk to me 12:53, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]