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:closed as wrong venue for the proposal. CFD is not for proposing the creation of new categories. Bearcat (talk) 22:20, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: I think it is high time this once underpopulated category now be split into multiple ones based on country, such as "American action adventure films". Kailash29792 (talk) 14:41, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I was expecting to see a thousand or more articles in this cat, but there's just more than 100. Excuse my high-levels of early morning fuckwittery, but aren't action and adventure essentially the same genre of film in the first place? And by adding the country-level sub-cats, won't this become a triple category intersection, which are usually discouraged? LugnutsPrecious bodily fluids 07:03, 7 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
CFD is for proposing the deletion (or merging) of categories that already exist, not for proposing the new creation of categories that don't exist yet. If you want to propose that a category be split into subcategories, the category's talk page — not CFD — is the appropriate venue to initiate that discussion. The existing category would not actually be deleted as a result, but would remain in place as a parent category for the new subcategories, so there's nothing in the nomination statement for CFD to discuss. I'm closing this as outside of CFD's purview. Bearcat (talk) 22:20, 10 October 2016 (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:merged as a thing that could have been handled speedy instead of needing debate. Bearcat (talk) 22:29, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This should have been a C2C speedy in line with the rest of Category:Culture by city in India but I created the target category without realising that most of the content was in this category. Le Deluge (talk) 11:14, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Merge -- the target has better syntax. Obviously the same thing. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:31, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator gets some brownie points for being cautious, but since the target category is in line with the established naming convention of the tree while the nominated-for-merge category is not, this actually was still fully eligible to just be listed for speedy. I'm going to close this and just go ahead with the merger, since there's not really any need to discuss this for seven full days. Bearcat (talk) 22:27, 10 October 2016 (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.
