Given the document below, you have to determine if "Yes" or "No", the summary is factually consistent with the document.

Document:
Liverpool manager NAME_1 has reminded NAME_2 and NAME_3 about their professional responsibilities and urged them to learn from a chastening week. NAME_4, the England international who will lead Liverpool's line at Wembley on Sunday in the absence of the injured NAME_5, was exposed for inhaling the legal high nitrous oxide on Monday. Then 24 hours later pictures emerged of NAME_4 and NAME_6 with shisha pipes. NAME_2 (right) was pictured smoking a shisha pipe with team-mate NAME_3 earlier this season . Liverpool boss NAME_1 (left) hasn't disciplined NAME_4 (pictured) or NAME_6 for the incident . NAME_6 was present among the Reds squad during their training session on Friday ahead of their FA Cup semi . NAME_7, who has NAME_8 available for the FA Cup semi-final with NAME_9, spoke to NAME_4 and NAME_6 in his office on Thursday but neither will be disciplined

Summary:
1. NAME_1 has reminded NAME_2 and NAME_3 about their professional responsibilities and urged them to learn from a chastening week .
2. NAME_4 was exposed for inhaling the legal high nitrous oxide on Monday .
3. Then 24 hours later pictures emerged of NAME_4 and NAME_6 with shisha pipes .
4. NAME_6 was present among the Reds squad on Friday ahead of their FA Cup semi .

Is the summary factually consistent with the document? (Yes/No)
Start your answer explicitly with "Yes" or "No", and if you answer no, explain which sentence is inconsistent and why.
