User:Theleekycauldron/Category intersection

I first came across the proposal Category intersection months ago, and my first thought was "this is obviously how the category system should be ran". So, I'd like to start strongly pushing for its implementation, because it's a common-sense measure that I think will greatly improve our awkward and haphazard category system.

How it works
The broad-strokes idea is this: Instead of having to put an American actor into the category "American actor", we should be putting the article into the categories "American people" and "Actors". This sounds more complicated; after all, you're putting the article into two categories instead of one. But in the long run, not only does it make everything simpler, it actually saves a huge number of categories.

Here's an example. Currently, if we wanted to categorize a sixteen-year-old, asexual, jewish, biromantic, non-binary Wikpiedian, singer-songwriter, guitarist, pianist, and violinist from Los Angeles, California, United States, under our category system, we might ostensibly use all of these categories:


 * 1) Non-binary Wikipedians
 * 2) Asexual Wikipedians
 * 3) Biromantic Wikipedians
 * 4) Child Wikipedians
 * 5) Wikipedians from Los Angeles
 * 6) California Wikipedians
 * 7) Jewish American Wikipedians
 * 8) American Wikipedians
 * 9) Non-binary violinists
 * 10) Asexual violinists
 * 11) Biromantic violinists
 * 12) Child violinists
 * 13) California violinists
 * 14) American Wikipedians
 * 15) Jewish American violinists
 * 16) 21st-century violinists
 * 17) American violinists
 * 18) Non-binary guitarists
 * 19) Asexual guitarists
 * 20) Child guitarists
 * 21) Biromantic guitarists
 * 22) 21st-century guitarists
 * 23) California guitarists
 * 24) American guitarists
 * 25) Jewish American guitarists
 * 26) American guitarists
 * 27) Non-binary pianists
 * 28) Asexual pianists
 * 29) Child pianists
 * 30) Biromantic pianists
 * 31) California pianists
 * 32) 21st-century pianists
 * 33) American pianists
 * 34) Jewish American pianists
 * 35) American pianists
 * 36) Non-binary singer-songwriters
 * 37) Asexual singer-songwriters
 * 38) 21st-century singer-songwriters
 * 39) Child singer-songwriters
 * 40) Biromantic singer-songwriters
 * 41) California singer-songwriters
 * 42) American singer-songwriters
 * 43) Jewish American singer-songwriters
 * 44) American singer-songwriters
 * 45) Non-binary musicians
 * 46) Asexual musicians
 * 47) Child musicians
 * 48) Biromantic musicians
 * 49) California musicians
 * 50) 21st-century musicians
 * 51) American musicians
 * 52) Jewish American musicians
 * 53) American musicians
 * 54) 2005–6 births

Obviously, that's way too many, and there'd probably be more given that 1. i can't keep all of these straight and 2. there'd probably be more specifics, such as what college this person went to, the category "Living people", etc. What should be pretty obvious is that we really only need these:


 * 1) Wikipedians
 * 2) Non-binary people
 * 3) Asexual people
 * 4) Children
 * 5) People from Los Angeles
 * 6) Violinists
 * 7) Guitarists
 * 8) Singer-songwriters
 * 9) 2005–6 births
 * 10) Living people

Then, if you want a list of Los Angeles Wikipedians, you could put in a simple formula, and it would give you everyone who appears in both "People from Los Angeles" and "Wikipedians". Just like that, we've saved the need for 44 superficial categories!

That's about all you need to know for the bare-bones of the proposal. But if you happen to be so inclined, stick around, because overhauling the entire category system is... complicated.

What categories do we keep?
There are two kinds of categories that I'm considering important: primary categories and secondary categories. Primary categories are the building blocks of the system: they can't be derived from anything else. Secondary categories, on the other hand, are constructs of primary category. For example, every American actor is both an American and an actor. No exceptions. Therefore, the category "American actor" is secondary category,

So what exactly do we do?
Well, I propose that all secondary categories should