Should these genre keywords be banned?

@bradley_kent 

Please re-read my post. I am asking whether these keywords should first be "audited" and then banned (so that they won't need to be "audited" perpetually into the future). 

No, they SHOULD NOT be banned, but audited

These are not two mutually exclusive things. One can happen first, then the other.

Yes, genres SHOULD NOT be keywords,

But what about the specific keywords listed in my post? That is the question that I am seeking feedback on. Should the specific keywords listed in my post first be audited, and then banned?

@Peter_pbn 

You might have missed the part of my post where I suggested that "reality-tv-as-subject" would be a much more appropriate keyword for the exact scenario you describe. There are also similar keywords like "war-as-subject," "crime-as-subject," comedy-as-subject," etc. 

And instead of banning the keyword in general, perhaps it could be blocked from titles that already have the genre.

I had actually considered that exact possibility before I wrote my post. But I decided not to bring it up, because I don't even know if it's possible for IMDb to ban a keyword only with respect to titles in a specific genre. Also, "reality-tv-as-subject" is a better solution all around, in my opinion. That keyword is more descriptive and avoids confusion.

@keyword_expert​ I beg you not to "purge" these keywords until they have been audited.  You will be destroying valuable factual information.  In the brief auditing that I have been able to do (others join in, please), there are many corrections, deletions and additions.  A 'scorched earth policy" would be devastating.

Keywords related to genres are not as easily merged as other keywords.

@bradley_kent​

You said you have already identified "many corrections, deletions and additions." Can you give us some examples? Did any of them involve situations where you identified a better outcome than simply deleting the genre keyword in question? 

How long might it take to "audit" these keywords? If it would take a long time, is it possible to "purge" at least some of these improper genre keywords now?

There are 28 genres, and I could give you examples of keywords related ro all these genres that need careful auditing.  Let's focus on just one, as an example, that I have been auditing: "war-movie"

Some of these have War as a genre, so the keyword needs to be deleted.

Some of these did not have War as a genre, so they may or may not need War added as a genre.

Some are documentaries about the making of a war movie, so need to be corrected to "war-filmmaking."

Some (like quiz shows) need to be corrected to "war-movie-as-subject."

Some may need the keyword "warching-a-war-movie."

War movies are meant to be about ACTUAL wars, so the specific ACTUAL wars involved must be added or corrected as keywords.

Some need the keyword "fictional-war."

And some contributors are still using incorrect keywords like "wwi" instead of "world-war one."

I could go on and on.  The audits NEED to be done.

This probem is also ascerbated by keywords that combine a genre with another genre, or use a genre as an adjective with another word.  Sometimes, this has extended to keywords that incorrectly combine one-two-three-four genres.

I just recently audited the faulty keyword : "biographical-documentary" to see if titles with that faulty keyword ALL have Biography and Documentary as genres.  But submissions of deletions on all titles that have the duplicitous "biographical-documentary" keyword WERE NOT ACCEPTED by the IMDb staff!

If only the IMDb genre and keyword list managers would cooperate with this enormous effort.

I am an old man with health problems, and can only do so much.

But, to "purge" these genre-related keywords before they have been carefully audited borders on criminal -- a destruction and distortion of facts -- of the truth.

(Hyperbole, yes, but this is what is happening.)

@bradley_kent​

Hyperbole aside, I am just trying to get a better sense of how worthwhile "auditing" these keywords actually is. I am looking for specific examples of titles that you have found where a genre keyword was used but where a different keyword was intended instead. You have said you have already identified "many" such examples. Can you give us a few?

Taking your example of "war-movie," there were only a handful of titles with this keyword. Did you actually find any titles in any of these categories you have listed, and if so, can you give the specific titles? 

Some of these did not have War as a genre, so they may or may not need War added as a genre.

Some are documentaries about the making of a war movie, so need to be corrected to "war-filmmaking."

Some (like quiz shows) need to be corrected to "war-movie-as-subject."

Some may need the keyword "warching-a-war-movie."

It sounds like we do agree that the keywords in my list are improper. My overarching goal here is to make sure that the keywords are not used in the future. Imagine if you had gotten rid of all these keywords through "auditing," but without any of us discussing any of these keywords via this forum? That might have solved the problem in the short run, but it would still allow for the problem to be repeated over and over again later, starting with the next time someone tries to use any of these keywords. I believe that unfortunate scenario is exactly what has been happening over the years with some of these keywords (for example, the keyword "noir"). 

Either way, I am willing to wait to resolve this until you and any other contributors are finished "auditing" these keywords. But at that point, all of the keywords should be perma-banned, even if they have been eliminated through manual editing. Again, that will prevent these problems from popping up in the future. Just let me know when you're ready for that. 

@bradley_kent​ By the way, I do think the best example of the value of "auditing" is when one of these improper genre keywords can be corrected to an "-as-subject" keyword. I have done that myself in the past with "noir" as a keyword; I am responsible for most of the "film-noir-as-subject" keywords:

https://www.imdb.com/search/keyword/?keywords=film-noir-as-subject&ref_=fn_kw_kw_2

But I realized that it is inefficient and unproductive to have to keep manually editing these keywords myself. It is much better to block "noir" as a keyword, which forces contributors to stop using it and find more appropriate keywords like "film-noir-as-subject" instead. That's the bigger picture here (for me).

What you may be adding as film-noir-as-subject has, in the past, been covered by film-noir-filmmaking.  I would only submit film-noir-as-subject if it was a topic on a quiz show.  Otherwise, film-noir-filmmaking would cover titles about the making of a film-noir, or a discussion of the film-noir genre in general

Check other similar genre keywords and you will find action-filmmaking, adventure-filmmaking, animation-finlmaking, etc.

Whatever the choice is, -filmmaking or -as-subject, a lot of keywords will need to be changed if the choice is one way or the other.

@bradley_kent 

 I would only submit noir-as-subject if it was a topic on a quiz show.  

That is way too narrow of an interpretation of the keyword "film-noir-as-subject."

For example, for a documentary covering the history of noir films, both the keywords "film-noir-as-subject" and "noir-filmmaking" may be valid. These two keywords are by no means mutually exclusive. And there is certainly nothing invalid about adding "film-noir-as-subject" to a movie that indeed covers film-noir movies as its subject.

With thee exception of quiz shows, they seem identical to me.

@bradley_kent​ The "-as-subject" keywords are broader than the "-filmmaking" keywords. The latter focus on the making of the style of film itself, while the former could involve anything pertaining to the style of film (particularly involving film plots).

For example, if a fictional character loves noir movies but doesn't discuss the details of how noir movies are made, "film-noir-as-subject" would be perfectly valid. 

If a podcast episode reviews a movie's plot, without discussing the filmmaking aspects of the movie, then this would be borderline, but it might qualify just for the "film-noir-as-subject" keyword, and not the "-filmmaking" keyword.

Along the same lines as quiz shows, any trivia about film noir other than in a quiz show might also qualify just for the "film-noir-as-subject" keyword but not the "-filmmaking" keyword.

Those are just a few hypothetical examples. I'm sure I could come up with others. In general, I think there are distinctions between movie plots and movie making.

There are what some might call a "plotless" title, but the story is an integral part of any title, perhaps only behind (and often front of) the director and just above the editor.  Screenwriters would greatly disagree with you that the "story" is not a part of filmmaking.

@bradley_kent​ You're not understanding my point. Once a film genre (or a specific movie or a specific character or a specific plot line) exists in the world, it becomes its own subject matter. A fictional character can love kung-fu movies, or super hero movies, or noir movies, without even thinking about how the movie is made. And this is just one example of why the "-as-subject" keywords are broader than the "-filmmaking" keywords.

But you are not understating my point.  Those situations would better be covered with keywords like 
"kung-fu-movie-fan" or "watching-a-kung-fu-movie,' etc. Those situations, indeed, would probably not be covered by "kung-fu-filmmaking."

@bradley_kent​  You may be surprised to learn that I agree with you that in such a scenario, "kung-fu-movie-fan" would be a better keyword than "kung-fu-movies-as-subject." However, better does not mean these two keywords are mutually exclusive. Indeed, it would be completely appropriate to add both of these keywords to such a title. That way, people could search under "kung-fu-movies-as-subject" and find more titles than just those involving fans of kung fu movies, or they could search for "kung-fu-movie-fan" if that is what they are interested in. Both types of searches (the broader and the more specific) should be enabled. 

@bradley_kent​

Can we come up with a plan and timeline for "auditing" and blocking these keywords? I feel like the longer these keywords exist, the longer their usage will proliferate, which only compounds the problem. Just in the past six months since I posted this list, some of these keywords have already doubled in usage (e.g., "reality-tv-show," "action-movie"). 

If the "auditing" of these keywords is not coordinated resulting in the blocking of these keywords, then we will find ourselves having to repeat the auditing over and over again, like a Sisyphean task, as other contributors continue using the keywords. That appears to be exactly what has been happening for years with the keyword "noir," for example.

Maybe we should take care of and report these keywords to IMDb staff in groups? Using my list at the top of this post, it looks like the film-noir substitute keywords are now ready for blocking. I can also resolve the horror, romance, adult, action, and short substitute keywords. Can you identify some genres you would like to handle for now? 

One other thing worth pointing out: there is no need to delete specific instances of these keywords if that would be the only edit. For example, if you see that the keyword "talkshow" has been improperly assigned to a title that already has the talk-show genre assigned to it, and you would have no changes other than deleting the "talkshow" keyword, you can leave it alone for now, and we can then ask IMDb staff to delete and block all instances of this keyword. That will save a lot of time and effort on our part.

I agree, but, since keywords change daily, the only solution would be to block the addition of these keywords, leaving the ones that already exist until they are audited.

And, that list of subgenres really needs to be revised.  As you noticed with the awful "basketball-sport" keyword, submitted deletions of that awful keyword resulting from audits are NOT processed because it remains on that awful subgenre  list.

The only solution seems to have new submissions blocked while the current keywords are audited.  Is that somehow possible.

P.S. I did work on noir, science-fiction, war, western, and a few others, but there is a huge amount of work to be done -- faulty submissions on new titles (with the year ????), and faulty acceptance of such faulty keywords by the staff.

A first step might be to delete  keywords on the subgenre list (like "basketball-sport") that are repetitive and useless.

@bradley_kent​ I assume it is possible to block the usage of certain keywords while they are audited, but I think that would only be worth doing for certain very popular keywords. 

For the other keywords, if they are submitted to staff in groups, and if staff take care of them quickly, there will be no need for temporary blocks.

I submitted all the deletions of the "biographical-documentary" keywords in a group, but they were all rejected since it is on the subgenre list.  Same thing happened when trying to delete "basketball-sport" on 10 or so titles.  Such submitted deletions were not accepted.

P.S. I also prefer "situation-comedy" to the cutesy "sitcom," by the way,

@bradley_kent​ I wouldn't worry about any keywords on the list of "accepted" subgenre keywords for now -- the sloppy subgenre keywords is a separate issue that staff have said they are working on. Interesting to know that these keywords apparently can't be deleted, though.

Also, there is no need to delete keywords on my list in this post, since we will be asking staff to delete and block them. Instead, the focus should be on any keywords that need to be changed to a different keyword. Making edits solely to delete one of these keywords is ultimately not worth our time, since staff can quickly and easily delete them upon our request.

@bradley_kent​ Here is some more evidence that IMDb will either deny or delay submitted deletions of keywords that happen to contain genre suffixes, even if the keywords are not on the list of "accepted" subgenre keywords.

I found a new title with 641 keywords, the vast majority of which were obvious spam. I submitted requests to delete or modify 631 of the 641 keywords. The vast majority of my submissions were approved and processed within a few minutes. But as you can see from the remaining keywords, the keywords containing genres as suffixes are not being deleted -- at least not automatically.

The keywords that have been delayed all include suffixes like "-war," "-crime," "-history," etc. IMDb has obviously flagged those suffixes to slow down or block the deletion process.

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt8126588/keywords

KEYWORDDELETION

KEYWORDDELETION

KEYWORDDELETION

KEYWORDDELETION

KEYWORDDELETION

KEYWORDDELETION

KEYWORDDELETION

KEYWORDDELETION

KEYWORDDELETION

KEYWORDDELETION

KEYWORDDELETION

KEYWORDDELETION

@bradley_kent​ I have now finished "auditing" the action, horror, film-noir, and romance genre keywords, and I have created a new thread to post these keywords for deletion and blocking. 

Please let me know once you've completed your audits of additional categories, so that I may include them in that other thread.

@bradley_kent​ 

I am not sure what you are doing in your audits.  Just looked at the faulty "action" keywords, and found some that had "action-movie" as a keyword, but NOT Action as a genre, or "action-filmmaking" as keyword.  I submitted corrections.

You're most likely duplicating my work, since I have added appropriate genres to a bunch of titles now. Keep in mind there can be a lag before edits are approved and also before they are reflected in search results. 

@bradley_kent​ We have already made so much progress! Thank you for your hard work on this project.

Again, I am begging IMDb, PLEASE, DO NOT DELETE, PURGE, ERADICATE, BAN THESE GENRE-RELATED KEYWORDS UNTIL THEY HAVE BEEN THOROUGHLY AND CAREFULLY AUDITED.

Case in point: I just did an audit of the 120 "adventures" keyword on Adventure titles, and was able to submit 350+ additions, corrections and deletions!

Those arrows in the little green box are misleading.  These keywords have not been completely audited.

Tread softly, or you will be erasing a lot of potentially correct information.

Genre-related keywords are very different from other keywords.

@bradley_kent​ "Arrows in the little green box?" I'm not sure what you're referring to. You mean the check marks? 

I only checked off the Adventure category once I saw that all the remaining titles with the "adventures" keyword in fact had the Adventure genre, so I assumed you were finished with it.

It would really help if you could post once you're finished with each category. Thank you!

@bradley_kent​ 

Please add the following keywords under Biography:

biopic

life-story

lifestory

Done. Thanks for catching those.

And how can we get IMDb to accept a deletion of "biographical-documentary" as a keyword?

Are you sure your edits have been denied (as opposed to being delayed/still pending review)? If they are still pending, then my recent comment here is the most likely explanation.  (Long story short: IMDb now requires manual review for deletion of any genre-related keywords, and there is a processing backlog for keywords right now.)

@bradley_kent​

Something dramatic has happened with the keyword "documentary-film" over the past 24 hours. This keyword is now assigned to 818 titles (including Adult titles). It is unclear whether this expansion of this keyword is the work of a contributor or of IMDb staff.

The good news is that all of the titles to which this keyword has been recently added are already assigned the Documentary genre.

The determiner, of course, as to when each one of these "bad" keywords can be banned/deleted/purged/eradicated is when the number of titles listed for each one equals "zero, zip, zilch, nada."

@bradley_kent​ I strongly disagree with that assertion. There is no reason for you and I to delete the keywords when auditing, given that IMDb staff can delete the keywords simultaneous with blocking them. 

The real determiner is making sure that the number of titles assigned a particular keyword overlaps 100% with the genres assigned to those titles. For example, if there are 10 titles assigned the keyword "sport," and all 10 titles also are assigned the Sport genre, then the keyword "sport" is ready for blocking and deleting by staff.

Yes, you are right.  Guess I was thinking of the result rather than the process.

@bradley_kent​ I am glad to hear it. I agree that neither of us need to spend extra time simply deleting these improper keywords when we know the staff can quickly delete them in one fell swoop. As you have pointed out, it will be important for staff to act quickly, so that the keywords aren't used again following the audits.

@bradley_kent​ What do you think should be done about the "documentary-film" keyword? That one was previously cleared, but now its use is proliferating. If the search numbers can be trusted, about 96% of titles with this keyword also have the Documentary genre. That percentage may go up or down over time.

I wish there were a way to filter the search results to only show titles without a particular genre (in search terms, a "NOT operator"). That would make these search results much easier to audit.

I wish there were a way to filter the search results to only show titles without a particular genre (in search terms, a "NOT operator"). That would make these search results much easier to audit.

This is possible if you use the advanced title search and add an exclamation mark to the URL:

https://www.imdb.com/search/title/?genres=!documentary&keywords=documentary-film

Ask and ye shall receive. This is an extremely helpful trick to know about. You are a genius, @Peter_pbn​. Thank you, thank you, thank you!

Under Biography, please add the "bad" keyword:

bio.

Keywords for the Biography, History, War, and News genres need very specific and particular auditing.  By their very nature, they are about real/actual events and people, so keywords like "based-on-real-person," "based-on-actual-facts," etc. are redundant and unnecessary for these titles and should be deleted.  IF not real/actual, the appropriate keyword would be "fictional-biography," "fictonal-history," "fictional-war," and (?)"fake-news."

One could logically argue that EVERY Biography, History, War, and News title is "fictional" since a lot of subjective selection and deletion goes on regarding what is included or excluded in such titles, but the decider should be whether the subject, itself, is real/actual.

This makes auditing some of the title in these genres difficult due to lack of information for determining whether the subject is real/actual.  Deleting or correcting the "bad" keywords in these genres sometimes requires extensive research, and this can take a lot of time.  If only the original contributors could be contacted!

@bradley_kent​ 

I should clarify that when I said this:

There is no reason for you and I to delete the keywords when auditing, given that IMDb staff can delete the keywords simultaneous with blocking them. 

The real determiner is making sure that the number of titles assigned a particular keyword overlaps 100% with the genres assigned to those titles. For example, if there are 10 titles assigned the keyword "sport," and all 10 titles also are assigned the Sport genre, then the keyword "sport" is ready for blocking and deleting by staff.

What I should have said in the second paragraph is that if there are 10 titles assigned the keyword "sport," and all 10 instances of this keyword either overlap with the Sport genre or should otherwise simply be deleted, then the keyword "sport" is ready for blocking and deleting by staff.

The point is that if the only edit to a title would be to simply delete a genre-related keyword, and to make no other edits, then there is no reason for us to do that, since it can be done by staff when they purge and block the keyword. 

Admittedly, it is cleaner if all the keywords are edited down to zero (which has apparently been your approach for many of these keywords), but that is a lot of extra (unnecessary) work in my opinion. 

Generally speaking, I use the word "auditing" here in a literal sense: "to make an audit of; examine (accounts, records, etc.) for purposes of verification." When I "audit" a keyword, I am looking for things that need to be corrected. It's like checking the books in a financial audit, looking for errors. For a successful audit, I don't think it's necessary to manually delete every single instance of a keyword just for the sake of deleting them -- that can and should be done on a broader level by staff, following the audit.

The important thing is for staff to act quickly after each category is finished; otherwise, with certain popular keywords, they may be used in the interim. 

By the way, there is a proven method for adding genres to lots of titles simultaneously. To do this, I have been using the "magic URLs" approach combined with @bderoes' method for mass-adding to multiple titles. It was somewhat complicated to figure out the appropriate URL, but it does work, it saves time, and it allows for simultaneously adding a specific genre to dozens of titles at the same time on the same submission form. This is highly recommended if the only edit is to add a single genre to numerous titles.

I used this method to add the Sport genre to more than 100 titles that have the "sports" keyword, and I didn't even need to open any of these titles' pages; I was able to determine the Sport genre was applicable just based on the titles' plot summaries.

If you're interested, I can walk you through the steps of how I used this method. It might come in handy for some of the titles that warrant the History, Reality TV, and Talk Show genres, for example.

The main problem with this is that, when doing the tedious process of title-by-title auditing, many other keyword and genre mistakes are revealed -- and they need corrections, additions and/or deletions.  Yes, this is very time-consuming, but it makes the data more accurate and truthful and, therefore, reliable.

I estimate that around 80% of the audits I have been doing on the "bad" genre-infused keywords have involved other needed additions, corrections and/or deletions.  This problem is just not as simple as it may superficially seem.

@bradley_kent​ I don't disagree with you on any of that, but those are separate issues from whether these are valid genre keywords that should be deleted from the database. Open up any set of 100 random titles from the database and you and I could probably find lots of errors to correct, including errors involving genres and keywords. But in my opinion I don't think these particular titles deserve that work just because someone happened to use improper genre keywords for them, and this would be outside the scope of auditing the keywords themselves. 

By analogy, it would be like if an independent financial auditor were checking the books for a company for a particular year, and instead of limiting the work to examining the numbers for accuracy and reliability, the auditor also spotted a bunch of issues with the company's substantive policies or human resource problems, and decided to step in and fix those as well. Even if that work is meaningful and correct, it would be outside the scope of the audit. 

I'm not trying to dissuade you from doing the extra work. One thing you might consider is setting up a private list of titles that might deserve further attention after these keywords are "purged" from the database. 

As you have pointed out, some of this auditing is really hard to do, not having seen the titles themselves. For example, the use of the Family genre should be very narrow per the guidelines--the title needs to be oriented toward children, not just suitable for watching by children. I am reluctant to add Family as a genre to a title unless I am absolutely sure it applies, and if I haven't viewed the title in question and there are no other context clues, then I can't be sure. I would err on the side of not making an edit I am not sure about, because to do so would just result in more bad data on IMDb. The same can be said of other genres, but Family is a good example.

@bradley_kent​ At this point, are you comfortable with staff moving ahead with deleting and blocking the categories of keywords that I have checked off as finished at the top of this post, plus the "war" keywords except for "movie-war," which I recently discovered and am currently awaiting approval of my edits? 

As we have both pointed out, the sooner the better for staff to delete these keywords once they are "audited"; otherwise, some of the more popular keywords could continue to be used.

@bradley_kent​ I have a question for you about titles that are, themselves, fictional talk shows. Obviously it would be appropriate to add the keywords "fictional-talk-show" and/or "talk-show-spoof" to these titles. But would it also be appropriate to add the Talk Show genre to them? After all, they are talk shows (just fictional ones).

Here are some examples:

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1841269/reference/

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0112097/reference/

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0108734/reference/

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0287872/reference/

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0241088/reference/

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt5919316/reference/

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0115382/reference/

@keyword_expert​ No.  Not yet, please.  I will get back to keywords, but am currently working on another large IMDb project.

@keyword_expert​ If its a fictional-talk-show, it should NOT have talk-show as a genre.  This is to be consistent with other situations like fictional-biography, fictional-news-show, etc.

The auditing process is really being hindered by IMDb's refusal to accept deletions of certain "bad" subgenre keywords, especially those that just combine two genres, i.e., history-documentary, biographical-documentary, sports-documentary, comedy-game-show, crime-drama, etc.

And, of course, documentary-film!

Where are these ridiculous and "just plain ignorant" decisions coming from, anyway?

And, why, in heaven's name, is IMDb continuing to accept keywords that are nothing more than the 28 defined genres?  Or, ANY "bad" keyword composed of a genre followed by the "-title" or "-film" addenda?

Unbelievable!

@bradley_kent​ Can you identify *some* of the genre categories that you believe are ready for keyword purging? Given the size of this project, it is best to pursue it piecemeal, rather than all at once. Which categories are ready, in your opinion?

@bradley_kent​ wrote:

The auditing process is really being hindered by IMDb's refusal to accept deletions of certain "bad" subgenre keywords, especially those that just combine two genres, i.e., history-documentary, biographical-documentary, sports-documentary, comedy-game-show, etc.

Are you trying to delete these particular keywords because you believe they do not apply to specific titles, or because you believe they are inherently bad keywords? As @Peter_pbn has recently pointed out in your other thread, these are now "accepted" subgenre keywords, so they are currently valid keywords under IMDb's policies (as long as they are actually relevant to specific titles). I agree that many of these subgenre keywords were not thought out very well and should be revised, but that is a different question from whether they should be removed from specific titles.

And, of course, documentary-film!

Where are these ridiculous and "just plain ignorant" decisions coming from, anyway?

As we recently learned (after you wrote this comment), the massive proliferation of the "documentary-film" keyword over the past week did not involve any staff "decision," but rather was the work of one or more contributors. 

And, why, in heaven's name, is IMDb continuing to accept keywords that are nothing more than the 28 defined genres?  Or, ANY "bad" keyword composed of a genre followed by the "-title" or "-film" addenda?

Unbelievable!

This is why IMDb staff needs to purge and block the keywords in my list at the top of this post. That will go a long way toward solving the problem.

I stand by my position that every category that I have checked off in this list has been thoroughly audited and is ready for purging and blocking -- at least as of a couple days ago, when I last checked the list. As you and I have both agreed many times, the longer these keywords exist after "auditing" and prior to deletion, the more likely they will be used by other contributors. That is why we need swift action from IMDb staff. To that end, can you please identify any specific categories or keywords that are checked off in my list that you believe are not ready for purging or deletion? 

The only correct way for these keywords to be blocked is to make sure that they have zero titles attached to them.  Otherwise, they are in need of further auditing.

@bradley_kent​ I have already proven otherwise in this very thread, and you agreed with me just four days ago. 

bradley_kent
10k Badge
757 Messages

 • 

16.7K Points

Yes, you are right.  Guess I was thinking of the result rather than the process.

Like

Reply

4 days ago

I have also explained that what matters is when the audit of any particular keyword is finished, not whether either of us waste our time by deleting all instances of each keyword that can be quickly deleted by staff. 

I'm sorry, but it Is not just a matter of deleting (or purging) the keywords in question.  One must make sure that the title in question has the correct keywords and genres.   That's why the audits are necessary.  Just deleting (or purging) a keyword without checking if it needs correction or change into a genre is a disservice to the facts.

@bradley_kent​ I'm starting to believe that you are trolling me. Either that or you are forgetting conversations on this subject from just days ago.

Still working on these.  It's going to take some time since some titles have very little information on which to make decisions regarding corrections, deletions and/or additions.

If only the original contributors could be contacted on remaining, unaudited titles..

Must get back to ANOTHER IMDb project before I can return to this.

@bradley_kent​ 

Here are the keywords that have not yet been fully "audited," although substantial progress has been made for some of them.

biographical 

biograph

biopic 

life-story 

historic 

mistery 

reality-television 

tv-reality

reality-tv-show 

tv-reality-show 

reality-show 

talkshow 

tv-talk-show 

television-talk-show 

Most of these audits have not been finished because of the need for additional research.  Some just have a lack of information.

Also, "biopic" has ONE title (Untitled Merle Haggard Bipic), but IMDb would NOT accept the deletion, for some reason.

These audits are often quite time-consuming and just don't happen "overnight."  I have been "chipping away" at these, but only can work on them every so often because of other projects.

@bradley_kent​ I understand.  I too have been working on this project when I can, and I agree it is time-consuming. 

@bradley_kent​

Would you consider "historical" to be an improper genre keyword?

historical (744 titles)

Only 353 of those titles have History as a genre.

Here are the titles with the "historical" keyword that do not have History as a genre:

https://www.imdb.com/search/title/?keywords=historical&genres=!History&Adult=include

Yes, it is an improper keyword.  As a standalone keyword, it repeats a genre, which should be a no-no.  (It is also a standalone adjective, and those kinds of keywords are always pesky.  Does it reflect the title's content, or is it a subjective evaluation of the title, itself?)

Again, this is why the "historical" keywords need to be carefully audited.  If not qualified for the History genre, the title may JUST need the "historical-event" keyword.  For instance, a Biography title may need "historical-event," but does not qualify for the History genre.

Also, is the history truth or fiction.  The title may need the "fiction-history" keyword.  

In these merges and mass deletions, there often seems to be an assumption of an all-encompassing understanding, when, actually, each title differs and needs individual attention.  As we all know, keywords are submitted by many different people with as many differing approaches, so to assume a sameness and generalize can be very destructive.

@bradley_kent​ 

Here are the improper "genre-infused" keywords that have not yet been fully "audited," although substantial progress has been made for many of them.

biographical 

tv-game-show 

historic 

historical 

reality-television 

reality-tv-show 

reality-show 

talkshow 

tv-talk-show 

television-talk-show 

(I have continued to update the list in this response through edits over the past several weeks.)

@bradley_kent​ We continue to make progress, slowly but surely, on "auditing" these keywords. As you have pointed out, it takes a lot of time to audit these keywords, partly because they involve edits not only to keywords, but also in some cases to titles' genres.

Also, today I discovered a new "genre-infused" keyword: tv-game-show 

I have updated the list of still-pending keywords in my previous reply.

@bradley_kent​ 

I continue to work on "auditing" these keywords at least a little bit each day. At this point only a few keywords are not yet fully "audited":

biographical 

tv-game-show 

historic 

historical 

reality-television 

reality-tv-show 

reality-show 

tv-talk-show 

television-talk-show 

@bradley_kent​ said:

If its a fictional-talk-show, it should NOT have talk-show as a genre.  This is to be consistent with other situations like fictional-biography, fictional-news-show, etc.

I just discovered something in the guidelines that contradicts your advice:

The bolded language ("though fictional programs that mimic the form are also included") expressly specifies that the Talk Show genre applies to these titles. 

Updated list:

tv-game-show 

historic 

historical 

reality-television 

reality-show 

tv-talk-show 

television-talk-show