Thread:Love Robin/@comment-3340859-20150820161412/@comment-366087-20150820163156

My day is fine so far.

What I'm doing is removing unnecessary categories. We don't *need* a category for "human". Everyone is presumed human. Am I a dog, or cat, or zebra? No. You *know* I'm human. That is why with every document and form you ever have to fill out about yourself, you'll never be asked if you are Human.

So you only need categories for when characters are *something else*. Alien, robot, pony, etc.

Same for Categories for Sons and Daughters (and grands)… *everyone* is *someone's* Son or Daughter. Even to grands and great-grands, etc. That is just a FACT of biological life. Everyone you will ever meet is a son or a daughter even if you never meet or see their parents.

So those too are *default-level* categories. What you do is to categorize according to life-roles which not everyone is a part of. Like Mothers or Fathers because not everyone *is* a Mother or Father.

Although "Parents" is better because it removes the need for a category because both mothers and fathers ARE parents, and we already have "females" and "males" to tell us the difference. A "Female" and a "Parent" = a mother. and "Males" tells us a parent is a father…

BTW, the categories on articles need to be reviewed. There are contradictory categories on many. For example a character cannot be BOTH "Intelligent" AND "Not too intelligent".

Plus, several articles have the same cats twice.