User talk:Nthep

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
User:Nthep   Talk page   Barnstars   Admin dashboard   Contributions   Sandboxes   Cites   Misc    


My User Talk page[edit]

I am not getting welcome message from other users. I saw those messages in other new user's talk pages. Okay i will not use Twinkle right now. --Darthvader Skywalker 01:22, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your help and speedy response NthepKing.parker3 (talk) 17:31, 1 July 2015 (


Go on why you deleting my question for? Answer it

I have answered your question - see the bottom of the page. Nthep (talk) 22:17, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Image swap[edit]

Hello. You have deleted a low-res version of File:Zhejiang Television.png, but I think the current hi-res one is unnecessarily large. It only needs to be clear enough for use in the article infobox. Please could you restore the original and delete the newer version instead? Cheers. Green Giant (talk) 09:51, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi, sorry about that - Iwas processing a huge backlog of F5 deletions so I wasn't really studying the detail. I agree the current version is far too large for a non-free logo but I also think the original is too small. I've put the image on a bot list to reduce which should occur in the next couple of days. Nthep (talk) 12:16, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Sergeant Stubby[edit]

The external link "Sergeant Stubby. The war dog of WW1" (Video). Youtube. July 11, 2014. Retrieved July 13, 2015.  you removed here appears to be a reading of the Wikipedia article. I don't know if it is properly attributed to Wikipedia, but I do wonder about your claim that it is a copyright violation. 7&6=thirteen () 18:22, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

The audio might be a reading of a version of the article but the video looks very much like it breaches some news channels copyright by using their background and inset newsreader, go right to the end and watch a copyright come up on the bottom left of the screen. WP:YOUTUBE is quite clear about being careful when linking, so without explicit evidence that it's PD or CC I took the link out. Nthep (talk) 18:42, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the clarification. 7&6=thirteen () 20:23, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
I'm only suspicious there is a possible copyvio, it might be legit but I think this is a bit of spamming - if not why not just make a recording of the article and upload that? Nthep (talk) 21:40, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Draft:IEEE Access[edit]

Hi, Nthep,
I see in my CSD log (User:Liz/CSD log), I gave this article a CSD G13 on 8 July 2015. My question is not that the page wasn't deleted (which is an admin's call, after all), it's that I don't see my edit in the page history. Until your edit on 10 July, there weren't any edits in the page history since September 2014.
Was my edit deleted from the history? I see from the page stats that some editor (probably me) looked at this draft around 8 July and I don't know why my edit would be removed. I care because I like to check my CSD log and see if a page wasn't deleted, what was the reason so I can improve my skills. So, it's puzzling to remember tagging this article but not seeing my edit in the history. Do you remember whether it was tagged for a G13 deletion when you edited it a few days ago? Thanks for any information you can provide. Liz Read! Talk! 18:37, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

@Liz: You did edit it on 8 July to tag for G13 deletion. I'd restored it the day before at the request of the only author via an OTRS ticket but they then dallied and didn't edit it before you'd tagged it for G13 again and it had been deleted. When I restored it for a second time I didn't bother to restore the two edits that were the G13 tags. Nthep (talk) 20:29, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
This is very interesting, thanks for explaining it to me, Nthep. I didn't see any indication that the draft had been deleted and restored, is that indicated anywhere in the page information? I also didn't know that when an admin restores an article, they can choose which edits to include or exclude.
There has been one other time where I could swear I edited an article talk page and participated in a discussion (it was a very contested article) but when I went back to look at the archived talk pages, no edits of mine show up! I still find it baffling but this provides me with one explanation of what might have happened there.
Thank you again for indulging me with an explanation. Liz Read! Talk! 21:09, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
Liz, my pleasure. You can always check the public logs for a page from it's page history (on most skins it's a link at the top of the page) and see deletions and restorations. What the log won't tell you is how much has been restored and it is an admin privilege to be able to only restore certain versions of a page. Nthep (talk) 21:17, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Verifying OTRS[edit]

Hey Nthep, in reference to your comment here, how do non-admin editors actually verify that something has been verified by OTRS? While we don't need to see the actual evidence (like a driver's license), it would be nice to have an official statement that can be referenced along the lines of "OTRS sez this is the TRUTH!" SQGibbon (talk) 16:43, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

I didn't add the comment as an admin but as an OTRS volunteer, so with that hat on you'll have to take it that as "OTRS sez this is the truth". I can't disclose what evidence other than to say it suffices, even other admins can't verify it unless they also work OTRS. Nthep (talk) 16:47, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
This seems like a problem, no? While we don't need to see the actual evidence itself it would be nice to have a link to a page that only OTRS can edit which states, like in this instance, "Patrick W.'s birthdate has been verified by OTRS as x". SQGibbon (talk) 21:36, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
But that's what my statement on the talk page does with a link to the ticket. If you doubt this or any statement relating to information supplied via OTRS then you can always ask at Wikipedia:OTRS noticeboard for another OTRS volunteer to confirm the information contained in the ticket. Apart from that you just have to take it on trust that information posted by anyone identified as an OTRS volunteer (checkable via m:OTRS/Users) is an accurate summary of an OTRS discussion. Nthep (talk) 21:55, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
Sorry for belaboring the point but in all my years of editing Wikipedia I've never really had to deal with OTRS and now the process seems a bit of a mystery to me so thanks for clearing up these details for me. When I click on the link for the OTRS ticket I'm unable to get past a log-in for OTRS folk so I am unable to verify that there is any such ticket in existence. Is that how it's supposed to work? As for posting at the OTRS noticeboard that's a decent enough compromise but still doesn't feel like like it's in line with the verifiability principle on Wikipedia. While I see no reason not to trust OTRS folk it's kind of weird that we have a claim that comes down to "trust us" where that sort of thing doesn't fly in any other situation on Wikipedia. SQGibbon (talk) 22:13, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
@SQGibbon:, sorry for the delay in replying. I understand where you are coming from. There are two things you want to know; the information and how it is verified. The first is easy, the second is a bit like any other source that isn't online - you have to accept it unless you have access to the source material. This verification by OTRS is fairly uncommon and it really only ever occurs when it involves personal information (especially in relation to BLP subjects) where to reveal the information used would breach privacy. All the OTRS volunteers are experienced Wikipedia editors as well so while it might not be as open as you might like, the answer is it is as good as it can get while respecting the confidential nature of the subjects. Nthep (talk) 18:28, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 12[edit]

Wikipedia Library owl.svg The Wikipedia Library

Bookshelf.jpg

Books & Bytes
Issue 12, May-June 2015
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs), Nikkimaria (talk · contribs)

  • New donations - Taylor & Francis, Science, and three new French-language resources
  • Expansion into new languages, including French, Finnish, Turkish, and Farsi
  • Spotlight: New partners for the Visiting Scholar program
  • American Library Association Annual meeting in San Francisco

Read the full newsletter

The Interior 15:23, 16 July 2015 (UTC)


Al Nahyan family[edit]

Then which talk page should he be on considering he is a part of the A Nahyan family? And any member of the Al Nahyan family is considered to be royal person due to the background of the family? So how about you add it on the correct list which clearly indicates the family. This is his role and background , Sheikh Umar Shahab Butt bin Zayed Al Nahyan — One of the many Prince of Abu Dhabi and prominent young businessman. Member of The Ruling Family. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jameyboy12 (talkcontribs) 21:33, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

  • We're not adding anything until you provide a source, that we can verify by going to the exact page you cite, showing that this person is what you say he is. We CANNOT just take your word for it. NawlinWiki (talk) 21:41, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
@Jameyboy12: Names and articles don't get included in Wikipedia just because they exist. They are added because they are notable and this information can be verified by information in reliable sources. As there seems to be zero information avaialble about this person that you and several others keeps insisting on adding to this article and others. Provide some specific sources and establish that he is notable then the problem is solved. But all I have seen is unverified rubbish that contradicts itself and a complete refusal to provide a single shred of evidence about him. If he is as prominent as you say this shouldn't be hard but you assertion that he is prominent flies against what you wrote in the edit summary before - "He is not internationally known due to his age" so which is it? Nthep (talk) 21:46, 20 July 2015 (UTC)


If you don't live in Abu Dhabi it's not my fault! How about you come to Abu Dhabi and see for yourself! Absolutely unhappy with your reasons for removal! Does not make sense. If you don't live in Abu Dhabi then ask residents of Abu Dhabi and find out for yourself! I've emailed Wikipedia even they said they don't know why you are are doing this unnecessary removal! So as advised by Wiki I am now adding it again! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hollomanshanks (talkcontribs) 22:00, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Read the answer above, the same applies. And it is down to you to provide the evidence that the person you are talking about is notable and that sources exist to support this. This is standard Wikipedia policy - see WP:BURDEN. Nthep (talk) 22:20, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Bad Candy[edit]

Could you delete commons:file:Badcandy.jpg as well please? —George8211 / T 16:12, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

I'm not an admin on Commons. You need to request deletion via the commons deletion process c:Commons:Deletion requests/Listing a request manually Nthep (talk) 16:14, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXII, July 2015[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 22:35, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Civility Barnstar Hires.png The Civility Barnstar
For your polite and professional demeanor in Ticket:2015021810008311. A challenging correspondent, well done. :) Maggie Dennis (WMF) (talk) 19:36, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - August 2015[edit]

Delivered August 2015 by MediaWiki message delivery.
If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an N to the column against your username on the Project Mainpage.

22:45, 3 August 2015 (UTC)