The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: rename. MER-C 12:36, 12 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:4th-century BC bridges to Category:Bridges completed in the 4th BC century
• Propose renaming Category:2nd-century BC bridges to Category:Bridges completed in the 2nd BC century
• Propose renaming Category:1st-century BC bridges to Category:Bridges completed in the 1st BC century
• Propose renaming Category:1st-century bridges to Category:Bridges completed in the 1st century
• Propose renaming Category:2nd-century bridges to Category:Bridges completed in the 2nd century
• Propose renaming Category:3rd-century bridges to Category:Bridges completed in the 3rd century
• Propose renaming Category:4th-century bridges to Category:Bridges completed in the 4th century
• Propose renaming Category:6th-century bridges to Category:Bridges completed in the 6th century
• Propose renaming Category:7th-century bridges to Category:Bridges completed in the 7th century
• Propose renaming Category:10th-century bridges to Category:Bridges completed in the 10th century
• Propose renaming Category:11th-century bridges to Category:Bridges completed in the 11th century
• Propose renaming Category:12th-century bridges to Category:Bridges completed in the 12th century
• Propose renaming Category:13th-century bridges to Category:Bridges completed in the 13th century
• Propose renaming Category:14th-century bridges to Category:Bridges completed in the 14th century
• Propose renaming Category:15th-century bridges to Category:Bridges completed in the 15th century
• Propose renaming Category:16th-century bridges to Category:Bridges completed in the 16th century
• Propose renaming Category:17th-century bridges to Category:Bridges completed in the 17th century
• Propose renaming Category:18th-century bridges to Category:Bridges completed in the 18th century
• Propose renaming Category:19th-century bridges to Category:Bridges completed in the 19th century
• Propose renaming Category:20th-century bridges to Category:Bridges completed in the 20th century
• Propose renaming Category:21st-century bridges to Category:Bridges completed in the 21st century

Nominator's rationale: Rename. Align name with the parent, Category:Buildings and structures completed in the 21st century etc., and the subcategories, Category:Bridges completed in 2001 etc.. Vegaswikian (talk) 23:06, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Support per nom and also because the proposed names are less ambiguous. Marcocapelle (talk) 03:17, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Support (it's almost a speedy) on the basis it will match with the categories above and below it in the tree. Sionk (talk) 19:40, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Clearly defines what the year is referring to, as opposed to meaning that the bridge was extant in that century (I would also appreciate clean up of this structure by upmerging the small yearly categories like those at Category:17th-century bridges). SFB 21:20, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: delete. – Fayenatic London 23:27, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Convert Category:Mobile Fidelity Sound Lab albums to article List of Mobile Fidelity Sound Lab albums

• Also Category:Mobile Fidelity Sound Lab live albums – added on relisting 5/5/15
• Also Category:Mobile Fidelity Sound Lab soundtracks
• Also Category:Mobile Fidelity Sound Lab compilation albums

Nominator's rationale: Per WP:CATDEF, a category must be a defining characteristic of a topic. Since the label Mobile Fidelity Sound Labs re-issues well-known albums, the category could not possibly be a defining characteristic. The albums are already famous for other reasons. Binksternet (talk) 09:30, 21 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak keep Is this any different than any other category in Category:Albums by record label? Sometimes, which label released an album is strongly tied to the artist and album (e.g. a lot of Motown or Blue Note for many jazz artists) and sometimes it's just a large parent corporation which releases lots of albums (e.g. Category:A&M Records albums). —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:56, 21 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, it's different because in every case, there was an original record label that identified and perhaps groomed the artist, then published the recording and marketed it. Then, after many years go by, Mobile Fidelity Sound Lab re-issues the album, without adding to its notability. Binksternet (talk) 04:17, 22 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • "Without adding to its notability" sounds like another of the sort of ill-informed opinion pawned off as fact that I see far too often for my comfort in discussions such as these. Within the context of CD reissues of classic albums, MFSL releases are usually important, particularly during the early CD era when the record companies' own releases were often of poor sound quality. Neutral on the CFD itself. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 03:03, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • In college in 1980–82 they told our audio engineering class about the benefits and drawbacks of every audio recording format including the soon-to-come CD. Of course there were vinyl aficionados who were fond of Mobile Fidelity Sound Labs' half-speed mastered LPs, but the presence of these did not significantly change whether the album was praised by critics. A particular MFSL re-release might be praised by audiophile reviewers, but the album's original notability was already firmly established. Binksternet (talk) 00:51, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete The label that reissues an album is not defining unless the reissue itself is independently notable from the original release. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 17:33, 22 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Which record company or label re-issues an album is hardly defining. In this instance I have no objection to a list. --Richhoncho (talk) 08:35, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - I agree with the above; not sufficiently defining. Neutrality^talk 21:09, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete. Ricky81682 (talk) 00:53, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:West Bloomfield Township, Michigan (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  

Nominator's rationale: Only entry is the town itself. ...William 15:23, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep There is a daughter category that has more articles. In any case I'll see if I can find other things to add to this category. WhisperToMe (talk) 15:34, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: Added two school districts serving the township limits. I'll try to get a whole list so all school districts serving portions of the township get added to the category. WhisperToMe (talk) 15:36, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep for reasons cited above. I also think that other articles should be added to this category. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 15:38, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak Delete Per WP:SMALLCAT. I don't think either school district is defined by the section that is within the city limits of the township. If Category:Schools in West Bloomfield Township, Michigan was upmerged, the category would have 3 valid articles which doesn't seem likely to aid navigation. RevelationDirect (talk) 03:52, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete West Bloomfield Township, Michigan is a bare bones article. There seem to be no notable historical events, no notable residents, and no notable buildings to include in a category. What would be the point of keeping a category for such an undeveloped article. Dimadick (talk) 18:08, 17 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:SMALLCAT. The text of the main article already links to the school district and the schools, that should be sufficient. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:30, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: delete. One program was not in the Adult Swim category, so I have merged it there. – Fayenatic London 15:36, 15 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Williams Street Studios series and characters (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  

Nominator's rationale: almost every show on Adult Swim is produced by Williams Street Studios (with a few exceptions). Every show listed here is an Adult Swim series, Williams Street rarely makes stuff for other networks and venues. My point is that this category is essentially a duplicate of Category:Adult Swim original programs, a category with a better name and has more pages. I say its not necessary to have this category, as literally every show here is also applicable in category:Adult Swim original programs and its only difference is including character lists, which isn't really necessary.

Rationale taken from speedy deletion request by Grapesoda22. I created after a request on my talk page. I have no recommendation myself. -- GB fan 00:40, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment -- We do not need duplicate categories. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:15, 12 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.