User talk:Chrisuae

Welcome to Wikipedia my friend

Hello! Welcome to Wikipedia ! I am really glad you made account as I told you. Hopefully you will like it here , and if you need any question please let me know :) thank you ! first tip : use ~ (4times) and you can have your post signed automatically which is easier :) Adnan (talk) 17:55, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Formal mediation has been requested

The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "Liverpool F.C.–Manchester United F.C. rivalry Honours Count sources". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. Mediation is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the request page, the formal mediation policy, and the guide to formal mediation, please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by 14 August 2015.

Discussion relating to the mediation request is welcome at the case talk page. Thank you.
Message delivered by MediationBot (talk) on behalf of the Mediation Committee. 22:17, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request for mediation rejected

The request for formal mediation concerning Liverpool F.C.–Manchester United F.C. rivalry Honours Count sources, to which you were listed as a party, has been declined. To read an explanation by the Mediation Committee for the rejection of this request, see the mediation request page, which will be deleted by an administrator after a reasonable time. Please direct questions relating to this request to the Chairman of the Committee, or to the mailing list. For more information on forms of dispute resolution, other than formal mediation, that are available, see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution.

For the Mediation Committee, TransporterMan (TALK) 01:01, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
(Delivered by MediationBot, on behalf of the Mediation Committee.)

Mediation on Liverpool-Manchester Honours Court

(This is being posted to the talk page of all three parties.) PeeJay2K3 has asked at the rejected mediation page whether or not it is too late for him/her to accept at this point. It is, but the case can be refiled. If you choose to do that, please file it as "Liverpool F.C.–Manchester United F.C. rivalry Honours Count sources 2" (notice the 2 at the end). However, let me note that this case appears to have had a fairly thorough mediation at the Dispute Resolution Noticeboard without any final consensus being reached and formal mediation through the Mediation Committee can only do the same kind of thing. Formal mediation is not a court or tribunal which will declare one side right and the other wrong. All it can do is to try to help to get the three of you to come to consensus. The primary difference between what you've done already at DRN and what would happen at MEDCOM is that you'll have a more experienced mediator — which is not at all intended to imply that the DRN volunteer was inept or did a poor job, it's just the nature of the difference between the two forums — and there will be no time limit on how long the mediation can take (and, indeed, formal mediations often continue for several months). But you each have to consider whether or not your position or that of the others is so entrenched that there is little or no chance of you changing your mind or compromising so that the three of you can come to consensus. If that is the case, then before refiling at MEDCOM you might want to consider, if you've not tried it already, a request for comments to draw in other editors to the discussion. If that doesn't achieve consensus, then you can still try formal mediation afterwards. For the Mediation Committee, TransporterMan (TALK) 13:36, 17 August 2015 (UTC) (Chairperson) (Not watching)[reply]

PeeJay2K3 has withdrawn his request that the case be reopened or refiled. — TransporterMan (TALK) 13:50, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks TransporterMan. The page is now being vandalised including the talk page. Is there anything that can be done to prevent this?

Admin noticeboards

Hi, I have reported User:Davefelmer for his uncivil behaviour and disruptive edits on several football clubs articles. Fma12 (talk) 15:02, 21 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

quick apology

Davefelmer (talk) 14:22, 7 September 2015 (UTC)sorry mate, I wasnt logged in accidently for a few edits I reverted this morning so they came through as from an anonymous user. Regardless, the edits were made due to legitimate reasons as I have explained for various reasons. You cannot inaccurately quote from sources or put in baseless information and find a source for it later. This is against everything wikipedia stands for and won't be tolerated.[reply]

CSKA Sofia

unofficial tournaments and friendlies arent honours. if you were to click on any of the "other trophies" you would see they are all friendly tournaments. also, in regards to Levski Sofia, the equivalent "honours" acknowledged as unofficial by CSKA were not done so by Levski and furthermore didnt even corroborate the club's own website so were removed and sourced. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Davefelmer (talk • contribs) 18:15, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Man Utd - Liverpool

Davefelmer (talk) 17:17, 19 September 2015 (UTC)Please be so kind as to explain to me where you got this 44-42 major trophy table from? All the FIFA sources that youve linked to justify the trophy counts and the big table lead to NOWHERE!! I can't believe I didnt check this. Aside from the fact that nobody buys this table generally, did you just make it up?![reply]

Further United-Liverpool Factual Concerns

Davefelmer (talk) 20:37, 19 September 2015 (UTC)as a side note, FIFA's site is clearly poorly maintained and hasnt been updated in years. Although the trophy haul is relatively up to date, it still says Liverpool's last trophy was in 2005 and United dominated for 10 years after winning our first title in two decades in 1993 despite them actually dominating for 20! This doesnt strike me as reliable.[reply]

More importantly, United do indeed list all the "major trophies" and nothing else on the club website. Your assumption that "other" trophies meant they werent "major" was incorrect as shown: http://www.manutd.com/en/Club.aspx. It clearly says under "club trophies" that it lists all "major" trophies won and clicking the link shows the Charity Shield included. This is corroborated by the site's assertion that United are the most successful club in England as shown: http://www.manutd.com/en/News-And-Features/Club-News/2014/March/Manchester-United-Museum-free-access-in-March-2014.aspx. Note the "most successful club in the history of English football" part within the text.

Thus, regardless of your Liverpool allegiance, this has to be acknowledged. Your attempt to cover up for this by stating liverpol show more "other" trophies when they count youth and reserve stuff as senior honours (which if United listed their equivalents, would still have more overall) has no basis anymore.

Reference errors on 26 September

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

On the Liverpool F.C.–Manchester United F.C. rivalry page, your edit caused a URL error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:38, 27 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]