User talk:Prolix

Need help

Hi Prolix, I need your assistance in the follwoing AfD discussions.

1. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rebel Foods
2. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zydus Wellness

Also, I need a second opinion on these following company pages from India. Most of them are low in content, created via AfC route which in turn got quickly approved by "New Page Patrollers". Which is very surprising? Also, the pages which are not even marked stubs.

1. Dixon Technologies
2. Khadim's
3. Subex
4. Stovekraft
5. Info Edge
6. Varun Beverages
7. Relaxo
8. Natco Pharma
9. Laurus Labs

All created by a single User ID (history included) which is heavily dependent on stock market's reporting. Most of the pages lack WP:SIGCOV. What made me curious is... to hide his/her track, the creator is nominating good number of articles in AfD and at the same time... he is creating new pages (for other companies). This seems to be a dubious way of editing wikipedia. -Hatchens (talk) 12:14, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi Hatchens, I've added my comments at the AfD's you linked. Thanks for bringing these to my attention! Regarding the articles you linked many of them are quite notable as far as my knowledge goes, but they're just really poorly written. Maybe a few maintenance templates can be added for now? I've added {{cleanup-PR}} to all of these articles, they may need more descriptive maintenance templates as well. If no one improves the following articles they should be considered for deletion:

• Dixon Technologies
• Subex
• Stovekraft
• Natco Pharma
• Laurus Labs

I haven't included the rest of the articles you mentioned because they seem to be notable enough but aren't well written articles, I'll try and improve a few of them if I can. Prolix 💬 13:51, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! I thought I might be wrong in my assessments. A second opinion from your end is a must. - Hatchens (talk) 14:22, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Hatchens, glad I've earned your trust! Feel free to ask me anytime, I'm always glad to help :D Prolix 💬 15:43, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Prolix, more than that brother... I have earned your trust too (I'm hoping). I like your due diligence and judgment calls. - Hatchens (talk) 15:47, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Hatchens, I trust you without a doubt! I really wish more people on Wikipedia were as respectful and understanding as you. I'll start participating in AfD's and AfC's more often from here on. The latter is a bit harder given the time one needs to put into reviewing a draft. Prolix 💬 15:50, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Prolix, For the greater good, trust has to flow both ways. Regarding AfDs and AfCs... we got to be vigilant. More than the quantity, we need to look for quality. - Hatchens (talk) 04:41, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Hatchens, sure thing, you seem to have got through the eligibility process for AfC's. Could you give me a brief overview of how to go through with this? I would certainly like to get started Prolix 💬 08:31, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Prolix, sure. Please visit this link and raise a request. But, before that, do read the guidelines. - Hatchens (talk) 14:04, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Hatchens, thanks I'll do that soon! Prolix 💬 14:40, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Prolix, all the tags which you have put at Dixon Technologies, Subex, Stovekraft, Natco Pharma, and Laurus Labs have been removed by the same creator. Besides that, at Zydus Wellness AfD page... sockpuppet is being used to govern the outcome. I need your "third" opinion on this. - Hatchens (talk) 11:48, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Hatchens, thanks for letting me know. I won't be re-adding the maintenance template for Dixon Technologies since it seems to have been improved slightly and doesn't have the same issues as the other articles I had initially put the templates on.

As for the rest of the articles, I've restored the template since they've seen no improvement to their content whatsoever.

With regards to the Zydus Wellness AfD, I suppose not much can be done about the outcome. The article has been improved somewhat though. Prolix 💬 14:14, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Prolix, you're the best! Thanks, mate. - Hatchens (talk) 14:20, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2021!

Hello Prolix, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2021. Happy editing, Fylindfotberserk (talk) 07:24, 24 December 2020 (UTC) Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Thanks Fylindfotberserk, wish you the same! Prolix 💬 08:10, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

ZEE5 Originals Web series section

Hi Prolix, I am working on ZEE5 Originals Web series section & it is incomplete. Was about to add more citations as the list was completed. Suddenly got the message that there is an edit conflict. Can you please address what is the limit to notable means so that I can take care of it? -- VKG1985 (Talk|E-Mail|Contrib) 13:13, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi Prolix, I have completed with edits. Please check now & let me know whether it is proper or not. -- VKG1985 (Talk|E-Mail|Contrib) 14:14, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

VKG1985, it isn't. The issue here is not with citations but instead with notability. I am inclined to remove the entire section about original series as per WP:NOTTVGUIDE. I am reverting your edit as of now, if you wish to re-add certain series do it only after a serious consideration of their notability. You may also consider removing certain older non-notable programs as well. As it stands now, I would really like to remove the entire section subject to discussion of course. Prolix 💬 14:20, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Prolix, Many things to express :)

• Thanks for the quick revert
• Thanks for explaining it in details
• Thanks for mentioning good faith & open to change after serious consideration of notability
• Read WP:NOTTVGUIDE & got a fair idea about it

If I will get some good notability then only I will go for it. Meanwhile, there is a small styling required. Working on it now. -- VKG1985 (Talk|E-Mail|Contrib) 14:40, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

VKG1985, you're welcome, thanks for making the styling changes, they were definitely necessary. The issue with adding a list of shows is that they're not very relevant to the reader, they only serve to lengthen the article and unnecessarily increase its size. It also makes the article look promotional in nature and therefore such lists should be avoided at all costs. Prolix 💬 16:08, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Sound's good Prolix & thanks/welcome for styling. Thumps up!!! -- VKG1985 (Talk|E-Mail|Contrib) 07:12, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Some baklava for you!

Happy editing! Wishing you and your loved ones a great next year and beyond. Zakaria ښه راغلاست (talk) 03:59, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Wish you the same Zakaria1978! Prolix 💬 14:17, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Yogi

Thanks for reverting this . Apart from being unsourced, it has more to do with notability, since as per template documentation, we are not suppose to add names of non-notable parents, children, partners and relatives (except spouses) in the infoboxes. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 15:20, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Fylindfotberserk, I had no idea about the notability aspect of this. Now that I think of it, I've rarely seen relatives mentioned in the infobox, it makes perfect sense really. Thanks for letting me know! Prolix 💬 13:46, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

You are most welcome. When my watchlist was not so large and I had nothing better to do because of an injury I sustained while training, I used to read Wikipedia template docs, guidelines, essays and policies , especially the ones relevant to the articles I frequented. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 13:52, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Fylindfotberserk, I suspect your watchlist is still quite a bit larger than that of most users :D. I wish I had the time to go through such documentation, keeping up with my watchlist alone is quite the task. I guess I'll have to rely on the expertise of users like you until I get through them all! Prolix 💬 14:03, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

7,937 articles as of now . I'll curb it down, but then again I don't feel like letting them go . - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 14:17, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Fylindfotberserk, how you keep up with so many is beyond me! I feel similarly at times, it's quite hard to trim my watchlist. Prolix 💬 14:51, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Averaging 150-170 edits per day this month, I check many more pages obviously. Going through the initial backlog in the watchlist takes about 3 hours that's when I do most of the edits, after which it is refresh, check and wait . I do not check "recent changes" nowadays, watchlist is enough . - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 15:27, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Fylindfotberserk, given the number of pages on your watchlist, 3 hours is a pretty impressive. I only check recent changes with various filters in place, helps weed out most of the problematic edits. Prolix 💬 18:06, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

The number of pages that get hits every so often is much less. I've many obscure articles that get edited once in 3 months. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 18:14, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Fylindfotberserk, yes of course, over time I've reduced the number of obscure articles in my watchlist. I feel that if most people don't read such articles there's little point in maintaining them. Prolix 💬 18:22, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Yup. I'll start with curbing those first. It will be a virtual feeling of "lightless", though the workload would be same since the more popular pages will be more of less the same. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 18:40, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Look at this, the smug. Looks like I've seen this before. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 19:24, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Fylindfotberserk, Hahaha, so have I. Luckily this one got the message and stopped edit warring. Prolix 💬 11:49, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Fylindfotberserk, good luck with that mate! I'm sure you can bring those numbers down :D Prolix 💬 11:50, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

It is like bringing down body fat percentage LOL! - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 11:53, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Fylindfotberserk, it is! Prolix 💬 12:01, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Yup . - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 12:05, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

They got blocked for 2 days. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 11:39, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Fylindfotberserk, yeah just noticed. Hope they learn from their mistakes this time. Prolix 💬 11:42, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Zee entertainment enterprises logo.svg

Thank you for uploading File:Zee entertainment enterprises logo.svg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.

Also:

• File:Zee media logo.svg

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:00, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

For your tireless contributions

		The Special Barnstar
		For your untiring efforts on reverting vandalism and improving the articles, every time. Am amazed at the speed with which you appear to protect the pages whenever I see them getting vandalized. Keep rocking. Rasnaboy (talk) 06:51, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Thank you Rasnaboy!! Prolix 💬 11:40, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Prolix!

Happy New Year!

Prolix,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Fylindfotberserk (talk) 07:41, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Thanks Fylindfotberserk, wish you the same! Can't thank you enough for your gracious help and assistance throughout this year. Prolix 💬 11:37, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Thanks man. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 11:38, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Prolix!

Happy New Year!

Prolix,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
MRRaja001 ^(talk) 12:48, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Wish you the same MRRaja001! Prolix 💬 13:25, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

regarding changed made to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palm_oil

accordingly to Wikipedia:Verifiability, in this case; only specialized knowledge likely to be challenged needs citation, since its common knowledge; citation is not needed,

if someone needs further instruction the Wikipedia link to trichromatic vision which was already included will help them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.132.99.144 (talk) 01:40, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

All material in Wikipedia mainspace, including everything in articles, lists and captions, must be verifiable. All quotations, and any material whose verifiability has been challenged or is likely to be challenged, must include an inline citation that directly supports the material.

Any material lacking a reliable source directly supporting it may be removed and should not be restored without an inline citation to a reliable source.

Deliberately misinterpreting a Wikipedia policy to attempt to prove your point is incredibly disingenuous behaviour and entirely unproductive. The statements you keep adding to the page are NOT common knowledge regardless of what you deem it to be. You've received enough warnings, if you continue to edit war/add uncited information you will be blocked. Good day. Prolix 💬 07:54, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

The Amul trinity

Hello, It seems you reverted my edit based on an thehindubusinessline.com article, does Wikipedia consider thehindubusinessline.com not being a reliable source.? Rameshvar (talk) 17:46, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi Rameshvar, it appears I used the wrong revert option. There's no issue with regards to sourcing. The content you added didn't seem to fit too well with that paragraph which speaks about the founding of the first district milk union and it didn't appear that HM Dalaya was a founder of sorts, but rather he was more of a technical contributor. I'm sure his contributions can be re-added in the lead with better phrasing. Prolix 💬 19:05, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

As the title of the article "The Amul trinity" it explains that: "Dalaya, who studied dairy engineering in Michigan State University with Kurien, is the one who provided Amul the technical backbone. When Kurien decided to make Anand his life’s calling, he turned to Dalaya. Dalaya and Kurien managed to locate the company and persuade its manager to loan them the machine, which they used to produce buffalo milk powder for the first time. Dalaya subsequently visited Denmark to study powder plant designs and operations. These efforts resulted in the Niro Atomiser, the world’s first sprayer-dryer designed for buffalo milk, installed at Kheda dairy in October 1955. The original credit goes to Dalaya — something that Kurien always acknowledged, and reiterated when the former passed away on September 12, 2004. While Patel dealt with the farmers, and Dalaya took charge of the technical and internal affairs of the dairy, “my role was only in marketing, external affairs and handling politicians, bureaucrats and other establishment people,” the ever-frank Kurien admitted at the time. In Anand, it was said that if Patel was the Father of Amul, Kurien was the Son, and Dalaya the Holy Ghost.

So it really seems they all three manage to create the company with different roles. One provided the technical backbone, Kurien and Patel had administrative roles. I think this should be noticed clearly in this page Rameshvar (talk) 19:18, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Rameshvar, it has been noted in the history section. All three have been mentioned with their roles explained. I suppose this could also be added to the lead, it just needs proper phrasing. Prolix 💬 17:55, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

I agree, you're right. I go ahead (by the way, very nice signature) Rameshvar (talk) 18:01, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

References

With regards to the comments you left on my talk page

How was my editing disruptive? Since I just included an image (which I clicked) which I thought better showcased the Mumbai skyline since it's newer. It was just a one time edit to both the pages of Economy of India and Mumbai and was in noway even close to the hyperbole used, 'disruptive'. You could have simply said it's not better suited instead of terming it as 'disruptive' or asked me for consensus building. Frankly, I do not care if you block my account for something as trivial as this (my efforts of providing images that I possess to Wikipedia), I'd rather not be on such a site which speaks of 'consensus' but basically bulldozes people with harsh words who might otherwise have good intentions. It's not like I'm a troll spreading propaganda. I could better use my time elsewhere. Addie666 (talk) 01:52, 15 January 2021 (UTC)Addie666

Addie666, I have no authority to block or suspend your account. Warning levels are automatically chosen based on the last warning on your page, since another user recently added a level 5 warning, that was what I went with as well. Disruptive because you've done this sort of image change without consensus thrice now. If you believe my warning does not accurately represent your actions then please do go ahead and remove it from your talk page, you have no obligation to keep it there. Prolix 💬 06:15, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Sabotage elses work

Do not sabotage elses work by citing no citings added. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.127.131.51 (talk) 14:34, 17 January 2021 (UTC)