1000 ELO. Am I now an intermediate?

That’s a good topic that deserves some thought. 

I would try to list some basic skills that constitute proficiency, such as knowing well some elementary checkmate patterns, some basic opening principles, having the ability to spot and employ common tactical ideas, …

I don’t have a clear definition ready to hand, but will give it some thought.

My Scholastic Awards have a list that might come close. It was created to lift youth chess players to a level that was competitive in a scholastic chess context. 

Scholastic Chess Awards
Pawn: the Pawn Award recognizes that the recipient knows how to play chess (and should be able to teach another).
1. Sets up board (light on right) and pieces correctly.
2. Demonstrates basic movement of each piece.
3. Demonstrate and explain castling.
4. Demonstrate en passant.
5. Demonstrate ability to recognize checkmate (complete “Pawn Award: checkmate in one” worksheet).

Knight: the Knight Award recognizes that the recipient has learned certain fundamental endgame and checkmate skills.
1. Previously earned Pawn, or achieve a NWSRS rating over 500.
2. Demonstrate understanding of checkmate of lone king with heavy pieces:
* queen and rook,
* queen and king, and
* rook and king (each from two random positions selected by the coach).
3. Demonstrate understanding of “fox in the chicken coop” pawn promotion technique.
4. Complete “Knight Award: checkmates and tactics” worksheet.
5. Demonstrate ability to read chess notation.

Bishop: the Bishop Award recognizes that the recipient has developed skill in coordinating the chess pieces, including honing his or her checkmate skills.
1. Previously earned Knight.
2. Force checkmate of lone king with two bishops and king.
3. Demonstrate understanding of opposition and outflanking through success with king vs. king exercise, and two king and pawn
exercises selected by the coach.
4. Complete “Checklist of Checkmates: Corridors” and “Checklist of Checkmates: Diagonals.”
5. Complete “Bishop Award: checkmates and tactics” worksheet. 
6. Demonstrate ability to write chess notatation

Rook: the Rook Award recognizes that the recipient has developed his or her endgame and checkmate skills, and has become a tournament player.
1. Previously earned Bishop.
2. Demonstrate understanding of Lucena (building a bridge) and Philidor (sixth rank defense) endgame positions (rooks and pawn).
3. Complete “Checklist of Checkmates: Intersections” and “Checklist of Checkmates: Knights.”
4. Complete “Rook Award: checkmates and tactics” worksheet.
5. Complete two scholastic tournaments (no voluntary byes or forfeits).

Queen: the Queen Award recognizes that the recipient has developed the habit of chess study, and has proven his or her abilities through success in tournament competition.
1. Previously earned Rook.
2. Demonstrate understanding of queen vs. pawn endgames (winning and drawing ideas).
3. Complete “Checklist of Checkmates: Combinations,” “Checklist of Checkmates: Queens,” and “Checklist of Checkmates:
Challenges.”
4. Complete “Queen Award: checkmates and tactics” worksheet.
5. Complete three scholastic tournaments (no voluntary byes or forfeits), scoring three points or more in at least one event.

King: the King Award recognizes that the recipient has become a strong scholastic player.
1. Previously earned Queen.
2. Demonstrate correct play from five opposition exercises selected by the coach.
3. Correctly solve fifteen problems in fifteen minutes selected at random from “Checklist of Checkmates” exercises with 86%
accuracy (13 of 15).
4. Show evidence of independent study of tactics exercises book, such as those by Fred Reinfeld, Bruce Pandolfini, or others (at least 100 problems solved).
4. Earn NWSRS or USCF rating above 1200.

So you need to have a coach and worksheets to be proficient?

No. To answer your question regarding proficiency, some modification of the list is needed. I do think the specific skills listed are pretty basic.

These two exercises are my standard for one part of the Bishop award.

Win with White to move/Draw with Black to move

Win for the side to move

So study of end game pawn and kung endings is required for proficiency?

I think you are on the same track as Silman based on his endgame book.  Different endgame ideas for different class players.

Silman’s Incomplete Endgame Book influenced the endgames that I include in my award curriculum. But, you need to see the Checkmates and Tactics exercises and the Checklist of Checkmates patterns also. These are harder to list.

Checkmates and Tactics consists of 150 exercises that get a bit more difficult as the student progresses through the awards.

Here’s a small sample. I would suggest that anyone who finds these difficult is not yet proficient.

Your two statements and mine are not mutually exclusive.

Absolutely not

Actually they are.  As I said, you use beginner incorrectly. Instead you need to use the term inept.

Beginner means a person who has just started playing.  Inept is someone who has played for a while but is still terrible.

You mean you are terrible in comparison the experts.

A proficient player exploits White’s error.

Or here.

Whether 1000 is beginner or intermediate isn't important imo as they're just labels. What is important is that 1000 is clearly a huge advancement on 700.

Or didn't bother himself to learn. If he takes that step some day, it will be the beginning.

I don't think Ziryab's description is one of "proficiency". More like "basic chess skills".

"Proficiency in chess" indicates a strong player of a ranking sometimes denoted by "Expert". FIDE 1900 and above for three years should ensure the necessary skills have been learned.

What I consider intermediate is between 1200-1800 but honestly it's a relative perspective. It's very much goal related, if your goal is to be a 1600 chess.com then it's a totally different perspective than if you're looking to become a titled player in the future

Although you could have a point, as unlikely as that is, my description is based on the sequence named in a post you clearly missed. Do try to keep up, if you can.

Wow, a lot more comments than I expected but I conclude that I am beginner close to intermediate.

I think I'll listen to Optimissed here. Sanctimonius Ziryab is not only cringe, but he is not even a post-grad professor as he claimed.