Keep – categorising skyscrapers by height seems the most obvious way of categorising them; the height is the essence. A cfd in 2007 reached the same conclusion. (The nominator should bundle these noms together, as was done in 2007.) Oculi (talk) 09:44, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support, per nom as arbitrary, and it's better to have skyscrapers in a sortable table with exact height (as alreadg mentioned in previous discussion), and (in contrast to what's mentioned in the previous discussion) deletion of these categories would not lead to one huge skyscrapers category since they're also diffused by country and city. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:25, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
comment IF these are to be deleted, first it must be assured that all the articles are in other skyscraper categories. Currently, some articles on skyscrapers are only in one of these height categories. Hmains (talk) 17:11, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Upmerge I normally argue for argue "one franchise: one category", but that would be going too far in this case. Nevertheless, we should not allow fragmentation of fictional franchise categories. Peterkingiron (talk) 20:46, 6 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
