Misgenred shows & WHEN are too many genres overkill and border on jumping the shark rather than helping anything?

Exactly, PBN: and did you click my link in OP to see that Columbo *IS* indeed misgenred as Whodunnit?

And do you not agree that, if it's a crime show like Mannix, it already implies there's the mystery of who has committed it, but there's no need to misgenre it as mystery because it isn't one? 

Mystery would be something like:

What Lies Beneath (2000) - IMDb

My huge pet peeve is fools slapping "comedy" and "drama" randomly to shows and movies which are NEITHER! But somehow, popular misguided belief is "if the characters get sad or aren't lottery-winning, drug-induced happy, then "it's a DRAMA, TA-DA!" and if the characters aren't sad, then they must be slapping thighs and falling over each other laughing... insta-COMEDY label. UGH!!! 

Something can be a Crime but not a drama (crime implies it's dramatic enough). Something can be a Romance but not a comedy. 
People have lost the plot (literally) or the genre. It needs fixing. I propose a pop up every time someone tries to slap "drama" or "comedy" to anything on IMDb, the pop up stops them and they must tick 2 or 3 boxes confirming after reading explanations of what comedies and dramas are.

I mean if you need 2 persons with 2 different keys to launch a nuke on the population, this is a no-brainer: stop launching "drama" and "comedy" all over IMDb! 

No emotions: I can explain it to you, but I cannot understand it for you.

The five genres that Mannix has (Action, Crime, Drama, Mystery, Thriller) seem appropriate.  Comedy?  No.  Although a particular episode might need the “comic-relief” or perhaps even the “comedy-episode” keyword (although I doubt the latter).  But Comedy as a genre at the series level.  No.

I already covered that at my OP in extensive detail. It seems you need to re-read^ my OP. Mannix was just an illustrative example of a well-known show I have rarely watched, but figured many would be familiar with, and was easy to "genre-analyze".

Again: if it's mainly action (which Mannix is, along with "crime") then "thriller" is already covered. That part is overkill. You feel thrilled when he's running around the streets and gets shot at? That's already covered under "action"! 

Likewise, if you have a thriller and the characters run around, that's still "Thriller" and no need to add "Action", the same you're not gonna call (and again, this is ALREADY in MY OP!!) a thriller or an action show/film a "Romance" just cos the lead snogs a person. 

Otherwise why not call it drama, comedy, action, adventure, romance and mystery thriller. (I'm still unclear how Mannix is a mystery, but again: rarely watched the show. Is it because it's a msytery if he'll catch the bad guy??)

Agatha Christie is a Mystery. Mannix is not. 

SIMPLIFY or else you'll have 97 genres per show is all I'm saying.

I also think 'drama' is too much, but I have no problem with it being here. I'm really not 'splitting hairs'. I'm about SIMPLIFYING things which have ERRONEOUSLY been made complicated by a "slap-genre happy" contributor, which you have proven yourself to be one of them, hence I maintain: YOU'RE A MAJOR PART OF THE PROBLEM HERE, and what's wrong with IMDb: allowing the clueless to continue to contribute erroneous info! 

I have read this entire thread.  I just wanted to let you know that, I agree, some titles have too many genres (I submit deletions) and some titles need one or more additional genres (I submit additions) to accurately represent the objective, factual reality.  The problem is that IMDb too often inconsistently rejects those deletions and additions.

You're replying to me while I edited my above post, and you've already posted a reply below BEFORE I even finished proofing my typos and appending to it! 

@_@   - Please re-read, if you care to. Or not.

I agree with you that IMDb denies contributions/deletions/additions when they are correct and grants access to people who contribute utter nonsense AND ARE ALLOWED TO DELETE OUR CORRECT CONTRIBUTIONS THAT WERE THERE FOR 10 YEARS WITH 300 YES VOTES, and the reason why I threw in the towel long ago. 

Now with the "click for more" it means that the saving pages service (I will get this GHOSTED and removed before you see it, if I again typed the location) can no longer save new contributions. 

Therefore I have seen "the battle of the thumbs down" (aka NO votes) perpetrated upon excellent trivia so that it is buried under "click for more" and the new trivia rises to the top. 

IMDb shooting itself in the fooT at its finest.

@majfoalbkeopaza​ 

If you read IMDb's definition of the Music genre, it says, "Contains significant music-related elements while not actually being a Musical," which means musicals should not generally have Music listed as a genre.

@Peter_pbn​ 

The key word there is “generally”. You left off the second part of the definition, which states, “this may mean a concert, or a story about a band (either fictional or documentary).” The Blues Brothers and La La Land are both movies where the main characters are musicians, which is just as important to their genre as the fact that they are structured as musicals. They belong in the same category as Singin’ in the Rain, but they also fit neatly alongside non-musicals like Coal Miner’s Daughter or Lady Sings the Blues.

The amount of examples on the site of titles with both the music and the musical genre clearly demonstrates that IMDb’s editors have not been following this definition to the letter. Also, it is clear that some amount of overlap is necessary and useful. To prevent any further misunderstandings, I think IMDb might want to slightly rephrase their definition to better reflect its actual usage; they would only need to change one word, really - “not actually a musical” to “not necessarily a musical.” That would actually make a lot more sense, and it seems to me to be the de facto definition users and editors are going by anyway, so why not have that reflected in the actual definition?