User talk:Prolix

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)

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)

Orphaned non-free image File:Chhatrapati Shivaji International Airport Logo.svg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Chhatrapati Shivaji International Airport Logo.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:31, 24 January 2021 (UTC)