Main character is not necessarily the protoganist

I came across this topic by chance, and it's quite an interesting one, as I recently discussed it with friends and realized that many people use these terms as synonyms. But this is not surprising, many people don't even try to analyse the films and TV series they watch (and I don't blame them). But the difference between protagonist and protagonist is still better felt in books, for example, I recently re-read To Kill a Mockingbird or The Hate U Give (I was inspired by other people's reflections on the plot in these books) These novels showcase how characters, often not the protagonists in the traditional sense, can be pivotal to the story's themes and overall message.

@adrian​ Although I take your point that TV can often be different from other types of creative works, this is not always the case. It matters, of course, what the exact plot is within a TV series. The example you gave where there are multiple main characters yet no protagonist is often called an "ensemble cast" TV series. (I assume you are referring specifically to TV series, and not to miniseries.) Also, the types of characters can change over the life of a TV series.  

Some examples may illustrate the point. In Orange is the New Black, Piper Chapman is both the sole main character and the sole protagonist for the first season. After the first season, there are a bunch of main characters yet no protagonist.

It's similar with The Walking Dead. Rick Grimes is both the sole main character and the sole protagonist for much of the series, until he isn't around any more. Then there is no longer a protagonist, while there are a bunch of main characters. 

In most soap operas, there is no main character and no protagonist.

In the A-Team, there are four main characters and four protagonists (all the same people).

In at least the first season of Stranger Things, there are arguably three protagonists (Mike, Will, and Eleven), and arguably a few more main characters (your definition of main cast). 

I do take your point that "main" characters are not always the same as the protagonists. And for that reason, it does make sense to decouple these sets of keywords. 

What about my questions about "lead" characters and "lead" actors/actresses? Are the "leads" always the protagonists, always the "main" characters, or not always either of these?  Was it appropriate to merge "villain-played-by-lead-actor" into "villain-as-protagonist" and "gay-lead-character" into "gay-protagonist," and so on?

@adrian​ What in your opinion should be done about the "lead" keywords that I have raised in this thread?

@keyword_expert​ Just skimming but you are factually wrong on a few points. Rick Grimes was never the sole lead character. He was one of a group of ever changing lead characters which also includes Darryl, Carol and Maggie. Literally, I can't think of a TV series that has a single lead. Literally, lead character for any TV series represents a whole range of characters, which I usually take as the credited cast (such as Friends where all 6 friends are the main cast).

@adrian​ I guess we can just agree to disagree about Rick Grimes, The Walking Dead, and whether any absolute rules can be applied to TV series generally (unless we're talking about "ensemble cast" TV series). 

But that wasn't what I was asking you about. I would really appreciate your response to this question, which I will copy and paste below. My question involves numerous variations of "lead" keywords (lead actors, lead actresses, and lead characters).

And what do you think about these mergers and auto-conversions (which have also already been done)?  Should any of these auto-conversions be undone as well?

villain-played-by-lead-actor (404 titles)  -->  villian-played-by-lead-actor (2 titles)  -->  protagonist-villain (14 titles)  -->  villain-protagonist (12 titles) --> villain-as-protagonist (46 titles)

villainess-played-by-lead-actress (125 titles)  --> female-villain-as-protagonist (6 titles) -->  villainess-as-protagonist (7 titles)

female-lead-character (54 titles) -->  female-lead-role (24 titles) -->  female-protagonist (7419 titles)

gay-lead-character (841 titles) -->  gay-main-character (85 titles) -->  gay-lead-role (30 titles)  -->  gay-protagonist (498 titles)

@adrian​ And keep in mind some of the dictionary definitions of the word "lead":

most important; principal; leading; first:

 Theat.
 a. the principal part in a play.
 b. the person who plays it.

And in turn, "principal" is defined as follows:

first or highest in rank, importance, value, etc.; chief; foremost.

a person who takes a leading part in any activity, as a play; chief actor or doer.

the first player of a division of instruments in an orchestra (excepting the leader of the first violins).

Finally, you said you can't think of any TV series with only one lead/main/protagonist. Some good examples that readily came to mind for me are TV series about detectives, such as the following examples:

Murder, She Wrote

Columbo

Cannon

All of those shows were undeniably carried by single characters, regardless of how anyone interprets the words "lead," "main," and "protagonist." 

@adrian 

It does sound like we at least agree (although probably for different reasons) that the following mergers involving these "main" keywords should be undone:

main-character-dies  --->  death-of-main-character  --->  death-of-protagonist 

gay-main-character -->   gay-protagonist 

Before I ask staff to undo those auto-conversions, can you please share your thoughts on my previous questions about the "lead" keywords? Should those auto-conversions be undone as well?

@keyword_expert​ 

I'm indifferent on lead keywords. I believe the era of a single lead character is over with ensemble casts making up all the shows I watch (and I watch a ton). Even MacGyver had another lead that appeared in almost every episode. It's been so long since I watched Murder She Wrote that I don't know if other characters appear in most episodes.