The ludicrous "new subgenres" continue to be deplorable

@bradley_kent​ 

The keyword "art" currently lists 5021 titles.  Adding the documentary genre to a search uncovers 5021 titles.  If "art-documentary" is to be an acceptable subgenre/keyword, you need to add it to 4238 titles.  This, of course, is all just redundancy and duplication.

I think you have some typos in your statements.

There are currently 2,082 titles that have both the Documentary genre and the "art" keyword. Of those 2,082 titles, I would guess most of them are not focused on art as a theme -- they just happen to include the word "art" as a plot point and keyword (and in some cases contributors may have applied the keyword "art" because they believe the title itself has artistic merit). The bottom line is that only a small percentage of these 2,082 titles will need the "art-documentary" keyword.

There are currently 766 titles with the "art-documentary" keyword on IMDb, of which only 80 titles currently also have the keyword art.

Perhaps the keyword "art" should be, or at least could be, added to many of the remaining 686 titles that already have the "art-documentary" keyword. 

But I don't agree that the keyword "art-documentary" should be added to all titles with the keyword "art" and the Documentary genre.

@bradley_kent​ Why would the keyword "art-documentary" not  apply to Bob Ross episodes? These episodes definitely feature "art," and they also meet the definition of "documentary" in that they "contain numerous consecutive scenes of real personages and not characters portrayed by actors."

Because... the series already has "art" as a keyword, and "Documentary" as a genre, so the series, and all its episodes, are already defined as an "art-documentary."

If you are going to add "art-documentary" as a "subgenre/keyword." then, logically, you need to add "art-documentary" as a "subgenre/keyword" to ALL titles that currently have "art" as a keyword AND "Dcumentary" as a genre.  It's called "logic" -- and "simple logic" at that.

@bradley_kent​ 

The keyword "art" combined with the Documentary genre does not always mean an art documentary (or the "art-documentary" keyword). The keyword "art" could be used for any number of reasons on a title, short of art being the theme of the title.

For example, there may be a documentary whose theme is telling the life story of a businessman-philanthropist who happens to collect valuable art as one of many plot points. Such a title deserves the keyword "art" but not the keyword "art-documentary."

In contrast, the keyword "art-documentary" signifies that the title is a documentary with art as a theme.

@bradley_kent​ p.s. Here is the simplest way to describe this: you are interpreting the keyword "art" to mean "art-as-theme," when in fact the keyword "art" just means "art." 

Not all movies and shows with the keyword "hot-tub" are focused on hot tubs as the theme of the movie or show. Likewise, not all movies and shows with the keyword "art" are focused on art as the theme.

@keyword_expert​ In the example you gave, the best keyword would be "art collector."

This all seems to get down to a definition of "art."  What you or I may assume as a definition is not what someone else may assume.  The "assumption of understanding" is the main reason for miscommunications.

I use "art" as a reference for painting and sculpture.  (Sorry, BUT "The Art of the Deal" is not art to me.  What distinguishes an artist from a artisan or a craftsman?  Is a great sportsperson an "artist"? A politician?  A minister? A streetcleaner?) Other "fine" arts, i.e., dance, music, etc. are listed by their own specific keywords.

This problem is also greatly affected by the inconsistencies regarding the guideline that, if a keyword represents all (or most) episodes of a series, that keyword should only be listed at the series level and not at the episode level.  Otherwise, EVERY keyword listed at the series level would also need to be listed for EVERY episode.  Redundancy, redundancy, redundancy.  Repetition, repetition, repetition.  Reiteration, reiteration, reiteration.  Useless, useless, useless. It's just unnecessary.

@bradley_kent​ 

What you or I may assume as a definition is not what someone else may assume.  

That's the problem. You are assuming that the keyword "art" means "art-as-theme" in 100% of instances where this keyword has been used. That simply can't be true.

This problem is also greatly affected by the inconsistencies regarding the guideline that, if a keyword represents all (or most) episodes of a series, that keyword should only be listed at the series level and not at the episode level.  

As a reminder, the guideline doesn't actually say that.

@bradley_kent​ 

In the example you gave, the best keyword would be "art collector."

Agreed. But the keyword "art collector" is not mutually exclusive with the keyword "art." Adding both keywords to the same title is perfectly acceptable.