Duplicate Keywords - List #45 (gun & knife keywords) (Proposals for Permanent Merger and Auto-Conversion)

@bradley_kent​ Very good point. I quickly found at least one title with the keyword "headshot" that actually refers to a headshot photograph. I will remove this keyword from the list.

@adrian​ 

"stabbed-repeatedly" is more succinct, but hasn't been used as frequently.

Also, using "multiple-times" in the keyword allows for better alignment with these other existing keywords:

shot-multiple-times (593 titles)

shot-multiple-times-in-the-face (3 titles)

stabbed-in-the-belly-multiple-times (9 titles)

For some of the other keywords, like "raped" and "punched," the word "repeatedly" has been favored over "multiple-times." But given the clear preference for "multiple-times" within the "shot" and "stabbed" keywords, that seems to be the better way to go for all these keywords for global consistency.

On that note, I have also added "shot-repeatedly" and "shot-multiple-times" to this list. 

Frequency shouldn't be the determining factor and you have merged in to less frequently used terms before. What should be the deciding factor is which is better going forward.

Don't "multiple-times"and "repeatedly" belie IMDb's rule of using singulars rather that plurals?  "kissed-repeatedly"?  "more-that-ten-henchmen"?  "multiple-family-relationships"?  I thought we were ridding ourselves of plurals.  And, yes, I prefer "child" over "children."

Should almost every western have "horseback-riding-multiple-times" as a keyword?  Almost every music have "songs-repeatedly"?  "bare-chested-men-multpile-times"?  "sex-repeatedly"?

"multiple-times" and "repeatedly" keywords are too subjective, against IMDb's "singular" preference,  and should not be a part of any keyword.

@adrian

Frequency shouldn't be the determining factor and you have merged in to less frequently used terms before. What should be the deciding factor is which is better going forward.​

We have had this conversation before, with a bunch of keywords. Once again, I have never said frequency should be a determining factor. Instead, I have said that it is is one of many important factors. In general, some of the relevant factors can include frequency on IMDb itself, frequency on the Internet at large, consistent usage across multiple keywords, proper grammar, clarity, and IMDb style conventions (e.g., favoring nouns over verbs, favoring nouns and verbs over adjectives and adverbs, favoring certain keywords with articles included). No one single factor should ever be determinative.

@adrian​ Plus, in this case, "repeatedly" is an adverb that means "over and over again; constantly." Using "multiple-times" is more likely to include twice than "repeatedly." So one concern would be that where the keyword "stabbed-multiple-times" has been used for titles where someone is stabbed twice, changing that to "stabbed-repeatedly" would be less accurate (because "repeatedly" implies more than twice).

@bradley_kent​ 

Doesn't "multiple-times"and "repeatedly" belie IMDb's rule of using singulars rather that plurals?  "kissed-repeatedly"?  "more-that-ten-henchmen"?  "multiple-family-relationships"?  I thought we were ridding ourselves of plurals.  

I don't believe "stabbed-multiple-times" or "shot-multiple-times" violate that guideline. These are acceptable keywords, just like "multiple-suspects," "multiple-personalities," "multiple-sex-positions," "actress-plays-multiple-roles," "multiple-girlfriends," "multiple-wives," etc. If you take the word "multiple" out of any of these keywords, the keyword would have a completely different meaning.

With most keywords that are nouns, it's not allowed to simply state the keyword as a plural. But as with any good rule there are exceptions, including the ones I've listed.

@bradley_kent​ And since you raised "multiple-family-relationships," that reminds me that the keyword "family-relationships" itself violates the guideline favoring singular keywords over plural keywords. I think I am okay with that.

On the other hand, @Marco once said that it would be better to convert the keyword "family-relationships" to "family-relationship." After all, there are titles with only two family members where only that single relationship between those two people is relevant in the title, and where the keyword "family-relationship" would make a lot more sense.

But "family-relationships" is an extremely popular keyword -- probably because most titles do have multiple family relationships. 

@keyword_expert​ 

In the thousands of movies and TV shows that I have seen, I can't remember a single instance where someone was stabbed exactly twice.

@adrian​ Well if you are interested in finding such titles, just do a quick Google search for imdb "stabbed twice." There are lots of qualifying titles. Same with titles where someone is shot twice.

@keyword_expert​ 

Keywords exist for stabbed-twice and shot-twice.

@adrian​ Yes, and I see that they are not used super frequently, which means it is likely that for titles where someone is stabbed or shot twice, at least some contributors are using the "multiple-times" keywords instead of the "twice" keywords.

shot-twice (36 titles)

stabbed-twice (2 titles)

If in fact (as I suspect) some people have used the "multiple-times" keywords rather than the "twice" keywords, that is one of several reasons why it would not be a good idea to merge the "multiple-times" keywords to the "repeatedly" keywords -- it could result in inaccuracies because it would result in the "repeatedly" keywords being applied to titles where the stabbing or shooting happens only twice.

In this sense, the "multiple-times" keywords are arguably broader than the "repeatedly" keywords. In general, it usually makes more sense to merge narrower keywords into broader keywords, rather than the other way around.

When I point out that one keyword is much more popular than another keyword on IMDb, a lot more can come with that than just the sheer numbers. That is what I mean when I clarify that I am never intending to suggest that the sheer numbers alone should be the determinative factor.

There are usually reasons why a specific keyword has been used more frequently. It could be just one strong-willed (and sometimes misguided) individual. But with more common and generic keywords like these "multiple-times" and "repeatedly" keywords, it is probably because multiple people are arriving at this keyword for a variety of reasons that make it more appropriate. 

@bradley_kent​ 

I view keywords like "stabbed-multiple-times" and "stabbed-repeatedly" to be exceptions to the normal rule against plural keywords. These keywords are phrases (not just simple nouns) that refer to a specific concept that is different in meaning from the singular concept, so it's a different plot point.

There are already quite a few acceptable keywords along these lines, all of which are allowed.

multiple-storylines (333 titles)

multiple-endings (301 titles)

multiple-perspectives (300 titles)

multiple-murders (203 titles)

shot-multiple-times (593 titles)

multiple-time-frames (136 titles) (this one should be spelled "multiple-timeframes")

multiple-cameos (96 titles)

multiple-suspects (74 titles)

multiple-narrators (72 titles)

multiple-lovers (67 titles)

multiple-identities (36 titles)

multiple-personality (135 titles)

multiple-protagonists (108 titles)

multiple-ejaculations (61 titles)

multiple-orgasms (123 titles)

actor-voices-multiple-characters (1470 titles)

actor-playing-multiple-roles (1136 titles)

actress-voices-multiple-characters (1016 titles)

punched-in-the-face-multiple-times (95 titles)

stabbed-in-the-belly-multiple-times (9 titles)

raped-multiple-times (7 titles)

multiple-timelines (25 titles)

And those are just a few that specifically contain the word "multiple." There are hundreds, if not thousands, of other acceptable keywords like this that don't contain the word "multiple."

@adrian​ That would be a very likely interpretation, but the problem is that different contributors use the word "one's" to have different meanings in various keywords. 

Here, the keyword "gun-held-to-one's-head" could mean, from the perspective of the protagonist, that a gun is being held by someone else to the protagonist's head. 

In fact, based on how I have seen the world "one's" used by some contributors in other keywords, I am quite sure that some contributors intended that very meaning for the keyword "gun-held-to-one's-head."

Another clue is the word "held," which is a slightly different word from "holding." The word "held" could imply by somebody else. And it probably does mean exactly that, at least as used by some contributors. 

Given the uncertainties and possible conflicting meanings, I think we should be cautious and not merge these particular keywords. The safer bet is to merge into "gun-held-to-head," which will not create any inaccuracies no matter what. 

The keyword "holding-a-gun-to-one's-head" is a little different. This keyword is so close to "holding-a-gun-to-one's-own-head" that I think we can safely assume they mean the same thing in all instances. An important consideration is the use of the word "holding" in combination with the word "one's," which could imply something different from the word "held."

All in all, the cautious approach is best, and in the process we can eliminate bad, vague keywords like "gun-held-to-one's-head," because these types of keywords do not indicate who is doing the holding (whether it is the same person whose head the gun is being held to, or a second person).