Genre mismanagement

They "comply" with IMDb definitions.  I have seen some of the titles, and other are largely unseen films having relatively little data on INDb..  For example, with The Great Northfield Minnesota Raid, I was trying to add Drama.  Now, it only has Western.  For The Souler Opposite, I was trying to add Romance.  This film is about a standup comic looking for love,  ("Souler" as in "soulmate"!) I can provide explanations for all, but IMDb should not just (apparently) arbitrarily reject genre submissions "on a whim" for tiltes unfamiliar OR unseen by staffers.

Last year, I just quit submitting Genres because IMDb was not accepting accurate and appropriate ones.  Perhaps I need to revert to that, and just let IMDb's Genres be non-inclusive and inaccurate.

Relatedly, any title with the incorrect "biopic" keyword should, instead, have Biography as a Genre or "fictional-biography" as a keyword.  Any title with "love- story" as a keyword should have Romance s a genre.  There are  many situations like this.  The keyword "biopic" gets deleted as a keyword, but Biography is not added as a Genre, i.d. Walking Tall.

These are not my decisions, but decisions made my IMDb long ago (in some cases, years ago) Perhaps staff turnover is one of the reasons why these decisions are not enforced.

Don't get me wrong.  I get some Genre submissions accepted and deleted, but the ones that are rejected are baffling.  There seem to be some unwritten criteria that only the keyword list manager(s) subjectively knows.

If there is a list of sacrosanct titles for which no new genres will be accepted, that list should be made knowable to the submitter so that we do not waste our time.

By the way, I have seen ALL of these eight titles.  Two -- The Great Northfield Minnesota Raid and It's My Party -- I have seen twice!

21 hours ago you said "I have seen some of the titles" but 12 hours ago you said "I have seen ALL of these eight titles". Which of these statements is true?

(By the way, I would advise against adding a genre if you haven't seen a particular title.)

The latter is true.  The previous statement was made without looking at the entire list.  Yes, I have seen all eight.  I was trying to correct the previous statement.

Right. Usually a newer statement overrides an older statement.

Hi Bradley Kent,

That doesn't sound like a comedy according to our definitions, which are quite strict.

"Virtually all scenes should contain characters participating in humorous or comedic experiences. The comedy can be exclusively for the viewer, at the expense of the characters in the title, or be shared with them. Please submit qualifying keywords to better describe the humor (i.e. spoof, parody, irony, slapstick, satire, black-comedy etc). If the title does not conform to the 'virtually all scenes' guideline then please do not add the comedy genre; instead, submit the same keyword variations described above to signify the comedic elements of the title. Subjective."

Were virtually all scenes in the film comedic?

"Virtually all scenes" should be changed/deleted from the Comedy genre definition.  With "virtually all scenes," you are eliminating ALL Comedy/Drama, Comedy/Musical, Comedy/Western ,etc. combinations.  Why, there are even Bob Hope movie where "virtually all scenes" are NOT comedic!  How about "most," or "50%," or "40%," "many," etc. to accurately reflect the reality.

And, don't forget keywords like "situation comedy," "screwball comedy," etc., etc., etc., as well as "spoof, parody, irony, slapstick, satire, black-comedy etc." are, in reality, sub-genres for titles that already have Comedy as a genre.  Logically, it would also seem that any title that has these sub-genres should also have Comedy as a genre, unless it has the "-scene" addendum.

Well, it is already in a Western genre, which tells a lot, although, of course, Western is not always Action and vice versa. 

Yes.  But... it is also a "Drama" and not a "Comedy." etc.