Duplicate Keywords - List #19 (Proposals for Permanent Merger and Auto-Conversion) (violence keywords)

@adrian​ 

Is it just me or is it unclear which keyword you want to keep?

The arrows point in the direction of the proposed mergers. For example, for the first entry, all keywords should be merged and auto-converted in favor of the keyword "cruelty-to-an-animal."

Also, why is this an idea instead of a problem?

This post starts out as an "idea" post so that contributors can review the list and comment. After a seven-day comment period, I will change the post to a "problem" post and ask IMDb staff to make the proposed keyword changes.

Also, throat-slash and throat-slitting probably should all be merged together as they are (virtually) the same thing.

This a tough call. I started drafting the list exactly as you suggested. However, I eventually came to the conclusion that slitting and slashing are technically two different actions.

The relevant definition of "slit" is "to cut apart or open along a line; make a long cut, fissure, or opening in."

The relevant definition of "slash" is "to cut with a violent sweeping stroke or by striking violently and at random, as with a knife or sword."

It is possible that for at least some of the instances of these keywords, these different meanings were intended.

The main difference between these two keywords is that "throat-slashed" can connote a fast, random, and smaller cut or puncture, while "throat-slit" can connote a longer, more deliberate, and longer slicing cut or incision. If someone's throat is cut all the way across, it is probably better described as "throat-slit," but if it is a single puncture wound, it is probably better described as "throat-slashed." 

There are no hard and fast rules here. But it seems to me that these two sets of keywords probably do not have 100% overlap. Unless someone can prove otherwise, I don't think they should be merged together.

@keyword_expert​ 

The arrows point in the direction of the proposed mergers. For example, for the first entry, all keywords should be merged and auto-converted in favor of the keyword "cruelty-to-an-animal."

This makes little sense. animal-cruelty, which is much more popular, should not be folded into cruelty-to-an-animal. animal-cruelty is brief and expresses the term without the need for extra words. Brief and popular should be preferred over verbose.

Generally, not always, my inclination would be to use the more commonly used keyword rather than the less common one. In the case of "animal-cruelty" I think that this is the common phrase for cruelty to animals; it's not going to be mistaken for the idea that an animal is being cruel to someone else.

I would suggest that for any keywords where you are suggesting merging a more popular keyword into a less popular one (such as replacing offscreen-killing (300 titles) with off-screen-killing (1 title)), it would be best to provide an explanation as to why the less popular version is an improvement.

@adrian​ 

Since there are now two votes in favor of "animal-cruelty," I have changed that entry accordingly.

This is more of a stylistic preference issue than anything else. My original thinking in favor of "cruelty-to-an-animal" is that it is more precise and clear.

By analogy, I dislike the keyword "child-murder" because you can't tell whether the child is the one being murdered or the one committing the murder. In general, keywords like that should be avoided in favor of keywords like "murder-of-a-child," "child-murders-a-child," "child-murders-an-adult," etc.

But as @gromit82 points out, in the keyword "animal-cruelty," there is probably very confusion that the animal is receiving rather than bestowing the cruelty. Perhaps it is possible for one animal to be cruel to another, but more likely that would be improper anthropomorphization. 

@gromit82​ 

Generally, not always, my inclination would be to use the more commonly used keyword rather than the less common one.

Agreed. Existing prevalence is a very important factor, but it is not necessarily controlling and can be outweighed by countervailing factors. I would roughly guesstimate that in at least 70% of cases I recommend merging in favor of the the most popular keyword.

In the case of "animal-cruelty" I think that this is the common phrase for cruelty to animals; it's not going to be mistaken for the idea that an animal is being cruel to someone else.

Fair enough, and you are correct that this is a commonly used term. I have changed this entry as you suggest.

I would suggest that for any keywords where you are suggesting merging a more popular keyword into a less popular one (such as replacing offscreen-killing (300 titles) with off-screen-killing (1 title)), it would be best to provide an explanation as to why the less popular version is an improvement.

There are lots of explanations I could offer for my keyword suggestions, but that takes up a lot more time and would be inefficient if I tried to do that each time I post a new list. I am always happy to explain specific entries when asked.

Regarding "off-screen-killing" versus "offscreen-killing," the thinking is to line it up with other keywords. In general, "off-screen" seems to be more popular than "offscreen."

On the other hand, "offscreen" is a completely valid adjective without the hyphen. Perhaps "offscreen" should become the preferred spelling for all of these keywords? I could go either way on this. Any preference on your part?

@keyword_expert​ 

child-murder clearly relates to a child being murdered. If the child was the murderer, then they keyword would be child-murderer.

I agree that "offscreen" should be the preferred spelling for any keyword. It is not a hyphenated word.

@adrian​ "child-murder" probably wasn't the best example. A better example is "child-rape" and "child-rapist." Do these keywords mean "rape-of-a-child," "child-rapes-a-child," someone who rapes a child, or a rapist who is a child?

And what about "child-murderer?" At a glance, it is unclear whether this is someone who murders a child, or a child who is a murderer ("child-as-a-murderer" or "child-as-murderer"). I think that was what I had in mind when I offered "child-murder" as an example. 

It's the same with "female-objectification" and "male-objectification." With keywords like this, you can't tell at a glance whether a female person is being objectified or is the one doing the objectifying.  Keywords like "objectification-of-women" and "objectification-of-a-child" would be far better, because they do not allow for any ambiguity.

Here's another one: "russian-invasion." Is that the same as "invasion-of-russia," or is it like the keyword "russian-invasion-of-ukraine?" You can't tell on the surface.

That was my thinking with "animal-cruelty" -- to make that keyword more in line with all other keywords, and for promoting clarity. But the majority here wants to keep it as "animal-cruelty," and I am fine with that.

Regarding "offscreen," it sounds like I should adjust the keywords in this list. I will revisit the list and make some changes to favor "offscreen" over "off-screen."

@adrian​ p.s. In fact, "child-murder" is not even an existing keyword, which kind of helps prove my point that "murder-of-a-child" is a better keyword. There is a keyword "child-murdered," which is better than "child-murder" but not quite as good as "murder-of-a-child."

child-murdered (16 titles)

murder-of-a-child (1395 titles)

@gromit82​ @adrian 

Based on your feedback, I have revised the list to favor the "offscreen" spelling over "off-screen" for keywords.

@Peter_pbn​ This one is also more of a stylistic preference than anything else. I agree that whatever the editors decide, I can live with.

There are at least a couple reasons why I prefer "slapped-in-the-face." 

First, with "slapped-in-the-face," the action word comes first, so you can tell from the outset what type of action is involved.

Second, "slapped-in-the-face" lines up better with popular keywords like "punched-in-the-face," "shot-in-the-face," "stabbed-in-the-face," etc.

While "face-slap" is definitely much more popular on IMDb than "slapped-in-the-face," when I Google "slap in the face" versus "face slap," it looks like the former wording is more than twice as popular on the Internet as the latter wording (7 million results versus 2.1 million results). The same is true of "slapped-in-the-face" versus "face-slapped," etc.

I can't figure out exactly why the "face-slap" wording has taken root on IMDb. I wonder if one or more contributors long ago edited the keywords to boost this particular wording, and everyone else has followed along.

To me, "face-slap" sounds awkward and slightly obscure. I view this as just another long-standing peculiarity of IMDb keywords. Another example is the former keyword "fired-from-the-job," which fortunately IMDb staff recently agreed to change to "fired-from-a-job" (much better). 

For those used to submitting "face-slap" as a keyword because it's shorter, if the editors agree to merge this one and set up auto-conversion, you will still be able to type "face-slap," and it will be automatically converted for you.

@bradley_kent​ I agree that "knocked-unconscious" is more serious than "knocked-out," but I disagree that the term "knockout" as in an attractive person applies here, because the keyword is a verb ("knocked out"), not a noun ("knockout").

Plus, assuming for the sake of argument that some users might have been using "knocked-out" to refer to an attractive person or their reaction to an an attractive person, that would actually weigh in favor of merging these keywords in favor of "knocked-out" rather than "knocked-unconscious."

Finally, there is the fact that, based on Google searches, "knocked out" is at least 21 times more frequently used than "knocked unconscious." The former is a much more common expression.

I, too, usually agreed that the choice should be for something that is "more common," but perhaps "more accurate" is an even better determiner.

I have also never fully understood the difference between "hit," "slap" and "punch."  Is "slap" with an open palm, "punch" with a clinched fist (or a party drink?), and "hit" either of these?  They seem to have been haphazardly submitted and accepted.

@bradley_kent​ Yes, there are definitely important differences between "killing" and "murder." For example, a killing in self-defense is not murder.

But here the context is "psycho-killer" and "psycho-murderer," etc. In this context, there is no difference. Certainly if one is a "psycho murderer," then one is also a "psycho killer."  And "psycho killer" is a much more common term than "psycho murderer" -- two terms that essentially mean the same thing.

@bradley_kent​ 

I have also never fully understood the difference between "hit," "slap" and "punch."  Is "slap" with an open palm, "punch" with a clinched fist . . . , and "hit" either of these?

I think "yes" to all three of these questions. 

@keyword_expert​ Still prefer "knocked-unconscious" to "knocked-out."  You could be knocked-out-a-window, knocked out of a political contest, knocked out of a job promotion, etc.  "knocked-uncnscious" just seems more accurate.  Oh, well... my thoughts seem to have little relevance of late...  Guess I am just not a self-appointed "expert."

@bradley_kent​ Thanks for the reminder about "knocked-out." Although either "knocked-out" or "knocked-unconscious" might be appropriate, is there a risk that some of the usage of "knocked-out" has been for situations like you describe (being knocked out of something)? For example, I see there is already a keyword for "knocked-out-of-the-ring." If people have used "knocked-out" for concepts like this, then it might not be a good idea to merge this keyword in favor of "knocked-unconscious," because that could result in inaccurate keywords.

I suppose even if there is a risk of this, the risk would likely be minimal. I will adjust the keywords to favor "knocked-unconscious," despite the small potential risk of causing a few inaccuracies.