User talk:Nthep

User:Nthep Talk page Barnstars Admin dashboard Contributions Sandboxes Cites Misc

Template:UserTalkArchiveBox

Rael Leviit Page

Clearly you are more skilled than me at reverting edits. Thanks. I am not sure what Wingtbot- is up to

All I do was remove the anti_Jewish, emotional rant.

You have reset it to my ast edit which is great.

Biscuit1018 (talk) 15:52, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

@Biscuit1018: I didn't read it in detail, the reason for my use of rollback was because of the apparent misformatting and misspellings. I've also blocked Wingtbot for breaching the username policy by having a name ending in -bot. Nthep (talk) 15:57, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Thank you. He/she was basically making anti-semitic allegations that aren't backed up with any facts. I don't think much of the subject at hand but we have to stick to facts and not wild allegations. It seems fortunate that he is a poor vandal. I do suggest you put the page on your watchlist Biscuit1018 (talk) 16:03, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

User talk:183.171.179.107

Can you delete the user page? 123.136.107.63 (talk) 08:37, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

there is no user page to delete and the talk page contains a valid, if dated, discussion topic. Nthep (talk) 09:05, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for the help

Thank you for providing me with the template, your help has boosted the project much. Iazyges (talk) 01:17, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ivana Raymonda van der Veen (2nd nomination)

Hello Nthep,

Perhaps other editors wouldn't agree that the discussion went way off topic, but I do believe that it will be hard to get input from the community if that back and forth situation remains on the AfD page. Recently, material from this AfD was moved to the AfD talk page because it was deemed toxic and irrelevant, so there's obviously a precedent. Anyway, could you please tell me how long I have to wait to renominate the article for deletion if there's a "no consensus" closure because of the material that you reinserted? Is there an official waiting period? There are two Wikipedians (including me) that believe the article should be deleted. The other person was merely sent by the subject to defend the article, but has zero experience on Wikipedia. That vote has no weight. There is no Keep rationale based on policies, so it's a 2-0 situation. Is that enough to avoid a "no consensus" closure? I'm guessing the answer is no, so again, please, how long would I have to wait before nominating the article for deletion again? Many thanks in advance. Dontreader (talk) 12:47, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

By all means hat the section where it has possibly gone off topic but don't remove them entirely, especially not just to a user talk page. No idea about how long to wait if this ends as no consensus. You might just be better walking away and letting others see if the article can be improved. Can I make a gentle reminder that BLP applies on all pages - WP:BLPTALK. Nthep (talk)

Many thanks for your reply. I would have responded sooner but my Yahoo Mail has quit notifying me of new messages promptly. I had to reload the inbox, and suddenly I saw many messages. Anyway, I've never hatted anything. I've just never had the need to do such a thing. In fact, I don't know what hatting is exactly. Perhaps if you have some time you could please take care of that, and that way you would decide what's relevant and what's not. I would be very grateful. Things were going sort of well in that AfD discussion until that person showed up, and then it all went to hell, and no more votes have been cast. I just think the place scares people away in its current state.

I know Ivana very well, and I can assure you that there's nothing else out there that can be added to the article. She has done nothing of interest since I created it. The article is based on a previous version that was speedy deleted. I looked under every stone, I swear. There's nothing more to add, and she doesn't have any planned projects that could ever be regarded as notable. She just makes YouTube videos. When I created the article I was always worried that it would be nominated for deletion, but I thought I could barely defend it enough for a Weak Keep closure. However, now I see that it cannot be defended. It simply doesn't belong here. Rebbing thinks that it's some sort of revenge against Ivana, but although I cannot bear her, I angrily quit my support for her months ago, yet I didn't touch the article back then. My very recent shocking discoveries through SimilarWeb exposed the article as misleading. I wish I had known about that service before I created the page.

And thanks, yes, I must always keep in mind the BLP issue. I appreciate the reminder. What made me so upset was that what Ivana's messenger said is exactly what caused me to stop supporting her. It instantly brought back very disagreeable memories. I can't explain or else I'd be making the same BLP mistake again. Please help me with the hatting if it's not too cumbersome. Whatever you do is fine with me, if you find time to do it. I think all I need is one more vote, but I fear no one will cast it. Many thanks again for your time and help... Dontreader (talk) 13:47, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Now the comments have been added to, it's probably not worth hatting now. Although it may be a case that once the AFD is completed that the whole discussion is courtesy blanked. Nthep (talk) 22:08, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

That sounds great, Nthep. I don't know how you admins communicate with each other, but for Ivana's sake it would be an excellent solution to blank the discussion, as you suggested. I sure know that what I did was very wrong. What I said was true, but it definitely raised BLP concerns, and my observations were little more than a display of resentful behavior. If the result is no consensus I won't nominate the article again for deletion. I am quitting my participation in AfDs. Many thanks, and have a great day. Dontreader (talk) 23:22, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Don't beat yourself up too much, we have all overstepped the mark at some point. The good news is that you have realised it yourself. Don't give up on AFD either, I've looked at your contributions and mostly they are pretty good. I have two suggestions for you. 1) don't participate in AFD where you find you have a high personal connection with the subject. 2) before you save your comments, preview them, count to ten and then consider if they are reasonable, fair and abiding by BLP or any other relevant policy before hitting aave. That's what I have to do sometimes. You have a great day too. Nthep (talk) 09:02, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks so much, Nthep! I really appreciate your support and advice. I really do try to do the right thing here and in real life, too, but a few mistakes can have very serious consequences. I will follow your advice very carefully. Just a couple of days ago I wrote a final thought in a reply, and it was an outrageous thing to say. I would have erased it if I had done what you suggested. I feel much better now because I was totally demoralized less than 24 hours ago with Wikipedia in general. I had totally lost faith in the project, and I was also afraid of hurting more people. Since I don't edit that often, I can also choose moments for editing when I'm in a decent mood, which was not the case recently due to temporary personal problems. Thanks for saying that my work here is usually pretty good! It means a lot to me. I'm very grateful for your kind message. Have a great day! It's 3:23 am here, so I should get some sleep! Dontreader (talk) 09:23, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union

Hello, could you please provide a source to the "official annoucement" that it is Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union rather than Secretary of State for Leaving the European Union? Jacqueline2008 (talk) 19:47, 13 July 2016 (UTC) I've got it now! https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-ministerial-appointment-july-2016-secretary-of-state-for-exiting-the-european-union Jacqueline2008 (talk) 19:51, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

All good things come to those who seek. Nthep (talk) 20:00, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Undeletion request for File:Jerrybrassiere.jpg and File:Yankeedoodlemousescreen.jpg

@Nthep Can you please undelete File:Jerrybrassiere.jpg and File:Yankeedoodlemousescreen.jpg. I want to work on it. YoshiFan155 (talk) 20:22, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

See your own talk page. Nthep (talk) 20:26, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

What can I do about it to restore them. I read Image use policy. YoshiFan155 (talk) 20:35, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Read the links I gave you. Nthep (talk) 20:40, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

How do I write full fair use rationale. I read the page you requested me. YoshiFan155 (talk) 20:55, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

The page contains several non-templated examples. Use those as a basis for writing your own. Do it on your sandbox page. Nthep (talk) 21:00, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

QMUL

I understand and consequently I added a reliable source now. Sorry for the misunderstanding and thanks for the advice;) Knowable (talk) 12:36, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Isobel Pollock-Hulf, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages ICI and National Physical Laboratory (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:41, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Good catch on Tania Pérez Cordova

Thank you for picking up that the information had been copied from another website. I saw that an image added to the article was a copy, but I missed it with the prose. —C.Fred (talk) 16:23, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

It just looked so copyvio that the search was worth it. I don't think the artist wants to be a subject of an article anyway looking at the edit history. Nthep (talk) 16:25, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

images

Thank you very much, so after the photographer sends the email, after how many days can we upload the picture again from the day he sends email of consensus? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emyskate1234 (talk • contribs) 22:03, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

answered at WP:MCQ. Nthep (talk) 07:38, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

A deleted article that has been possibly recreated

I noticed you moved an article, Ariane bellamar, to Ariane Bellamar. I was wondering if this was a recreation of an article deleted at AfD per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ariane Bellamar, because it looks a lot of the one that I remember having been deleted. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:44, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

@NinjaRobotPirate: It looks very much the same but with a bit extra (Have to say the unusual formatting if nested tables sniffs of socking). I've tagged it for G4 deletion as I'd like another admin's opinion on it. Nthep (talk) 08:06, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

@Nthep: @NinjaRobotPirate:Hello everyone, I'm very new to Wikipedia, so I'm just learning the ropes. Late Saturday I began editing an article I found posted on Ariane Bellamar. There were some problems with it, so I talked briefly with Jim1138. I went back and edited the article more carefully. This morning I saw it was tagged for speedy deletion. At first I planned to contest it (as I had put a fair amount of effort into researching and updating the article), but when I went back to the previous deletion I realized the issue was not one of content but of notability (again, I'm learning). One of the things I did when editing this article was to clarify information. It seemed that a number of the facts I found had be overblown or slightly skewed. After reading WHY the previous article had been deleted, I now understand (and agree) that this subject likely does not meet the "noteworthy" requirement as set forth by Wiki. Therefore I am not contesting the deletion. Thank you for your work on Wikipedia. Gamergirl1 (talk) 14:47, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

@Gamergirl1: don't worry, we've all been in this position. Chalk it up to experience. Nthep (talk) 14:53, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

@Nthep:Will do. Thanks. :) I do have a question though. Why was the Ariane Bellamar article unlocked to be recreated in the first place? I can see in the history that AidenRice requested it be unlocked for a "Human Rights Update" before AidenRice created the new article. The only human rights update that I can find any reference to in the media involves Bellamar claiming that hers were violated based on (again, her claim) that she was fired as a result of her C-section conflicting with a television shooting schedule. Do the administrators verify requests before unlocking? I realize there are probably a number of request and that would require a great deal of verification, but I was curious about the process and how it works. Gamergirl1 (talk) 15:37, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

I suppose there is probably an article about the procedures somewhere...I just have to find it. :) Gamergirl1 (talk) 15:53, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

@Gamergirl1: The title has never been locked from editing or creation (salted) so I've no idea what AidenRice's edit means, he could have just created the article again but instead chose to create it at Ariane bellamar (article titles are case specific after the first word). Controversial moves e.g. recreating a salted title, do merit examination. Nthep (talk) 16:37, 25 July 2016 (UTC) PS you don't need to ping someone on their own talk page.

Ok, thank you. ...and no more pinging. Next question, I see a draft where the article used to be. It's an outdated draft with erroneous information in it. What is a draft (in terms of Wiki) and what is it's purpose? Is this something that can also be edited? Gamergirl1 (talk) 16:42, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Just seen the draft, I'll give it the benefit of the doubt at the moment and just left a comment but if there isn't some significant changes fairly soon the draft too will get deleted. Wikipedia:Drafts exist to provide a place for articles to be developed safer from the threat of speedy deletion but blatent attempts to bypass the deletion policy are not accepted. Nthep (talk) 17:00, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Ok, thank you again for all of your help. I apologize for asking so many questions. Gamergirl1 (talk) 17:08, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Ask away, it's not a problem. Nthep (talk) 17:19, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

2017 Formula One Season

which you deleted has been recreated again.[1] Can I suggest SALTING? Its creator has recreated it two times after it was speedy deleted....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 13:41, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

redirected and temporarily protected. Nthep (talk) 13:44, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

UT-Austin

Hi, You have deleted my page, Department of Religious Studies-UT. We would like to use wiki to stream line our information process for our faculty. Why have you deleted our page? I have permission from the department since I am a worker for them and have been tasked with creating this content. Can you restore our page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by KatSanch (talk • contribs) 17:30, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

@KatSanch: As has been pointed out on your talk page, Wikipedia is not a web host. If you really want to use Wikimedia software there are many sites that use the software and allow web hosting. Otherwise you could talk to the university's IT staff to see if either UT already uses the Wikimedia software or would be willing to install it onto the university's servers where you can use it. You have realised, I hope, that by posting the material on Wikipedia you make it available to anyone in the world to read and/or edit - not something I beleive you or your manager want. Nthep (talk) 17:38, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - August 2016

Delivered August 2016 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.

22:07, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXIV, August 2016

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Hawkeye7 looks at disease control and defence satellites Op-ed: TomStar81 on the rise of air power Timeline: This month in World War I

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) 07:58, 7 August 2016 (UTC)