I have no objection to that. When I created Category:Great Bridge, it was identified as a bridge in Chesapeake, Virginia, and was not in Category:Great Bridge, Virginia, which category was only just created today (2½ years later). And since the place named Great Bridge, Virginia no longer exists as a separate municipality, I was not even aware that such a place existed. I thought that "Great Bridge" was a descriptive name for the bridge, and it probably was – i.e., the former town community was probably named for the (original) bridge, not the other way around. The Wikipedia article on the place claims that it was named for the Battle of Great Bridge, which is almost certainly wrong. The article on the battle indicates it was named for the place, the exact opposite claim. The reality may be that the community of that name did not exist at the time of the battle, so the battle was named for the bridge (whose name was intended to be descriptive, and included the word bridge only once, not twice), but if that's the case, then the battle article is currently erred in claiming it was named for the place named Great Bridge, and I hope someone will address this error soon. I have no interest in the area, only in drawbridges. Anyway, I am no authority on the subject, and I was just doing my best to give an appropriate name to the category for the bridge when I created it in 2017 – at which time no "Great Bridge" categories existed, having all been created just today. Steve Morgan (talk) 04:33, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I just noticed that the article on the place named Great Bridge does not say anything about it ever having been a municipality at one time. I just assumed that Geo Swan was correct on that point, but it was appears he was not. It was probably an unincorporated area which, at some point, was annexed by Chesapeake. But I do not have time (nor interest) to research that at present. Steve Morgan (talk) 04:57, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
There are multiple communities named "Great Bridge".
Sorry Steve Morgan, I don't think it matters whether the Great Bridge was merely a community, or an incorporated municipality.
I think the multiple maps show it was a community, at the time of the battle. Not counting the fort, the church, and the two batteries, I count 32 houses and outbuildings. Geo Swan (talk) 06:14, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Whether or not it was a municipality is not relevant to the changes being discussed here, but it was an error, and I prefer not to leave errors uncorrected, even in informal discussions. Now, returning to the discussion (which I was already planning to do at this time): Having thought about it more, I now have a different position. Assuming that the name of the original bridge was purely descriptive, and that the community was named after it, then any article or category name of "Great Bridge Bridge" or "Great Bridge bridge" is a misnomer, inaccurately implying that the bridge was named after the place, whereas in fact the current (2004) bridge was simply named after the predecessor bridge, and the previous bridge named for its predecessor at the same site, etc back to the original bridge. I now suggest moving Category:Great Bridge to Category:Great Bridge (2004 bridge) and then converting the resulting redirect at Category:Great Bridge to a disambiguation page. (Well, it looks like you have already started to make a change like this while I was writing this message.) Steve Morgan (talk) 07:32, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Continuing from my last message: For the same reason, the Wikipedia article currently titled Great Bridge Bridge (which was a redirect until very recently) should be moved also, and I suggest moving it to "Great Bridge (2004 bridge)" and then placing a hat note at the top to point people to a disambiguation page listing other uses of the name Great Bridge on Wikipedia (including the community of Great Bridge, Virginia). I am willing to make those changes if you wish. Steve Morgan (talk) 07:46, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I see that the cited 3-11-2018 Virginian-Pilot article says that some of the predecessor bridges were at different locations than the current bridge, which lends some credence to the same article's claim that the current bridge's name really is Great Bridge Bridge. In that case, the Wikipedia article perhaps does not need to be moved, but ideally someone should find a source for the original bridge's name, so that the article can indicate that (some or all of) the earlier bridges were named simply Great Bridge, not Great Bridge Bridge, and that the original name was simply someone's (whose?) descriptive name. Steve Morgan (talk) 08:04, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
