Subgenres should not be types of Keywords

Upvoting and downvoting of keywords is already allowed, and so is editing/deletion of keywords.

Yes, but it doesn't do anything.

And I know individuals can edit/delete, but it's not similar to an upvote/downvote system. A keyword can be heavily upvoted on a page by lots of users, then some random can come in and just remove it completely. No-one even knows that it has disappeared. Disagreements over keywords become people just adding and removing it. No keyword is safe on the site. You can clean up an entire part of the site, and someone can undo it just as quickly as you tidied it up and you wouldn't even know.

I liked your prior idea of setting up the system to automatically delete keywords that get below a certain negative down-vote score (for example, -4 or lower). That approach could be applied to all keywords -- there's no need to limit it just to subgenre keywords. 

Maybe, but that was poorly received for keywords generally.

Perhaps subgenres could be placed in a special section of the keyword page for each title -- at the top or the bottom of the page, separated from the other keywords.

Maybe, but I think the main issue is that their addition and removal should be handled altogether entirely differently. I don't think I should be able to just purge an entire subgenre from the site (theoretically possible).

@Skavau​

You suggested that upvoting and downvoting of keywords "doesn't do anything."

To the contrary, upvoting and downvoting of keywords determines the order that keywords are placed on the keyword page. This in turn affects which 5 keywords are placed on the title page for each title, since the system pulls those keywords based on which 5 keywords have the highest net votes.

Most users in most circumstances only ever see those first 5 keywords, and for those who do visit the actual keywords pages, most users don't look much further beyond those first 5 keywords. So it can matter quite a lot which keywords are placed at the top. And therefore it isn't correct to say that the current voting "doesn't do anything."

You also suggest that a very popular keyword can be deleted and then "[n]o-one even knows that it has disappeared." That isn't accurate, either. There are a few contributors, you and me included, who pay special attention to keywords, and will notice the absence of a very popular keyword. Plus, the person who added the keyword in the first place will likely notice when the keyword is gone.

When a good, popular keyword is removed, it will either be added back in eventually, or in serious cases there can be a complaint in this forum, and IMDb can step in and tell the contributor who removed the keyword to stop with the keyword vandalism.

You seem to be suggesting that users should not have the power to delete keywords at all (except through downvoting). I disagree with that, but I also note that it's a different topic altogether.

I have to say I often find it hard to determine whether to upvote or downvote your "idea" suggestions. On the current one, I upvoted, even though I disagree with the title of your post ("Subgenres should not be types of Keywords"), but I do agree with some type of voting system on subgenres.

You often suggest multiple topics within the same "idea" post. As a result, if a user disagrees with even one of your suggestions, they are more likely to downvote the entire post. That is why I downvoted this prior post of yours -- there are just too many topics in there to support the post as a whole.

In your current post, you have at least three topics: (1) subgenres should not be keywords, (2) voting on subgenres should be allowed, and (3) to add a subgenre to a title in the first place, the subgenre would need to appear on a pre-approved list ("white-listed" in your words). 

I disagree with the first idea, agree with the second idea, and am neutral on the third idea.

My suggestion would be to keep each "idea" post simple by proposing only one topic at a time. You are more likely to get upvotes that way.

To the contrary, upvoting and downvoting of keywords determines the order that keywords are placed on the keyword page. This in turn affects which 5 keywords are placed on the title page for each title, since the system pulls those keywords based on which 5 keywords have the highest net votes.

That's all well and good, but heavily downvoted keywords still come up in searches. You can downvote a wrong keyword 20 times, the title will show up on that keyword search.

Most users in most circumstances only ever see those first 5 keywords, and for those who do visit the actual keywords pages, most users don't look much further beyond those first 5 keywords. So it can matter quite a lot which keywords are placed at the top. And therefore it isn't correct to say that the current voting "doesn't do anything."

Alright, it doesn't really do much.

You also suggest that a very popular keyword can be deleted and then "[n]o-one even knows that it has disappeared." That isn't accurate, either. There are a few contributors, you and me included, who pay special attention to keywords, and will notice the absence of a very popular keyword.

I don't think it really should be on us to heavily police the keyword sections of the site as we do to keep it accurate and useful.

Plus, the person who added the keyword in the first place will likely notice when the keyword is gone.

This is unlikely. I added hundreds of "[x] historical setting" keywords. Not that I imagine it likely that people will mess with those keywords, but  it's completely unlikely that I'll notice if one disappears if they do.

You seem to be suggesting that users should not have the power to delete keywords at all (except through downvoting). I disagree with that, but I also note that it's a different topic altogether.

It is a different topic, but in an ideal world I'd call for basic site protections against potential vandalism and ignorance. Such as a delay on new accounts editing keywords (and other things), or a level of base activity before they are permitted to do so.

I have to say I often find it hard to determine whether to upvote or downvote your "idea" suggestions. On the current one, I upvoted, even though I disagree with the title of your post ("Subgenres should not be types of Keywords"), but I do agree with some type of voting system on subgenres.

Well the only reason I am suggesting making "subgenres" their own class of tagging is because my original suggestion for keywords was roundly rejected.

I can remove the "whitelist" part of my idea for subgenres, as that was only proposed to prevent the problem keywords have now - 4 different common terms for one concept. I can't really bring up (3) in isolation because it relies on other changes happening first.

I personally am in favour of the entire keyword system converting into a voting system to add and remove (or hide, as it would be a 'soft remove' in this instance) but because other users seemed to reject that idea outright, viewing keywords as purely factual things - it seems to be a nonstarter.

You must agree there is a dissonance between keywords including subgenres if keywords are supposed to be purely referencing factual things about the title. 

@keyword_expert​ 

My suggestion would be to keep each "idea" post simple by proposing only one topic at a time. You are more likely to get upvotes that way.

@Skavau​ 

You must agree there is a dissonance between keywords including subgenres if keywords are supposed to be purely referencing factual things about the title. 

Not really. Here is how the IMDb guidelines define keywords:

A keyword is a word (or group of connected words) attached to a title (movie / TV series / TV episode) to describe any notable object, concept, style or action that takes place during a title. The main purpose of keywords is to allow visitors to easily search and discover titles.

Subgenres can be "styles." Subgenres usually involve plots, in a broad sense. Subgenres are usually "notable," because they describe the entire title. And subgenres can be a great way for visitors to search and discover titles. 

I acknowledge your point that keywords are supposed to involve plots, but there are many other types of keywords that are a much worse fit under that criterion than subgenre keywords.  

@keyword_expert​ I suppose I meant from the terms of reference of specific users here who take keywords to only be dealing exclusively in factual things.

@Skavau​ I'm not sure what you mean by "factual things." Do you mean "objective" versus "subjective?" 

@keyword_expert​ Yeah, sorry. 

@Skavau​ Well in that case, it will depend on the specific keyword involved.

The current guidelines include a bunch of "accepted values" for subgenre keywords. Most of them are objective, like "nature-documentary," "basketball-sport," "werewolf-horror," etc. Some have ranging degrees of subjectivity, like "raunchy-comedy," "quirky-comedy," "cringe-comedy," "steamy-romance," and "epic-western."

Like you, I tend to favor the objective keywords. I don't remember ever adding one of the more subjective subgenre keywords to a title.

Other subgenre keywords not on that list are even worse. For example, I recently submitted a request to delete the horribly subjective subgenre keywords "arcane-fantasy," "light-comedy," "slow-burn-romance," and "copaganda." I think most users would agree these keywords are terrible because they are way too subjective, and most importantly, IMDb staff will probably agree too.

The moral of the story is be careful of one-size-fits-all solutions. With the case of subgenre keywords, some are good while some are bad.

"I think most users would agree these keywords are terrible because they are way too subjective, and most importantly, IMDb staff will probably agree too."

I mean "Copaganda" is just a derogatory term.

But other than that, having a proper voting system for these things would solve the problems here. The community would come together and vote on what subjective subgenre terms accurately describes a series or a film. Incredibly commonly subgenre terms are subjective - "psychological drama/thriller/horror". "Urban Fantasy", "Space Opera", "Neo-noir", "Neo-western".

I don't feel its fair for me to remove many of the keywords for some of the things under those tags, but I would downvote them in many cases.

Right now, anyone wishing to delete something even if they are in the minority can just delete it.

I previously said:

Perhaps subgenres could be placed in a special section of the keyword page for each title -- at the top or the bottom of the page, separated from the other keywords.

That exact modification has now supposedly been made when viewing titles on smartphones using the IMDb app, although I have not yet been able to successfully view it myself.