Talk:Cercle Brugge K.S.V.

Football Mid‑importance

	Association football portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Association football on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FootballWikipedia:WikiProject FootballTemplate:WikiProject Footballfootball articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Belgium

	Belgium portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Belgium, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Belgium on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BelgiumWikipedia:WikiProject BelgiumTemplate:WikiProject BelgiumBelgium-related articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

before Club Brugge, but the latter club became the more successful and popular football club of the city

Removed this line. Cercle are not defined by Club's achievements thank you very much. Whether Club are more popular is utterly irrelevant on a page about Cercle, do Club say that Cercle won the title first on their page????

Fair use rationale for Image:Cercle brugge3.gif[edit]

Image:Cercle brugge3.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 Wikipedia articles 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 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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 05:22, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived 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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus. Suggest revisiting in a month or two, but next time please do it as a multi-move rather than listing a dozen separate RMs all with the same rationale. Jenks24 (talk) 14:34, 8 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Cercle Brugge K.S.V. → Cercle Brugge KSV — Most sources refer to Cercle Brugge KSV, not Cercle Brugge K.S.V. (see their Official website and UEFA page). 18:14, 25 May 2014 (UTC).

Support move. Also, I think that this is how the Manual of Style recommends to write abbreviations. Coreyemotela (talk) 20:17, 25 May 2014 (UTC).[reply]
Oppose - as unnecessary. There is no clear consensus on this and it is my understanding that either is acceptable. Some people say that as an abbreviation it should have the ".", others not. Fenix down (talk) 09:26, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - unnecessary and inconsistent. Have a look also at Talk:Manchester_United_F.C./Archive_12#Requested_move. --Pelotas^talk^|^contribs 18:45, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.