Talk:Sabah F.C. (Malaysia)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Fair use rationale for Image:Sabah.gif[edit]

Image:Sabah.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 08:43, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Sabah FA. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:07, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 24 February 2021[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved as per GiantSnowman's proposal below.  — Amakuru (talk) 13:23, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]



Sabah Football Club → ? – The club has a new official name Sabah Football Club and a new common name Sabah F.C./FC. Since in the cat Category:Football clubs in Malaysia a bit more club use F.C., thus better follow the naming convention. Matthew hk (talk) 03:07, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The only problem is Sabah FC (Azerbaijani ) exist. Matthew hk (talk) 03:09, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page moves. GiantSnowman 12:28, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Move to Sabah F.C. (Malaysia) and Sabah FC (Azerbaijan) respectively - standard naming format for those countries, and standard way to disambiguate clubs of same name in different countries. Then turn Sabah F.C. into a dismabig and has Sabah FC redirect there. GiantSnowman 12:32, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support this alternative proposal. Well thought out and consistent with our previous practice (and presumably therefore consensus, or at least it's a prima facie case for it). Andrewa (talk) 16:18, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.