User talk:Medusahead

Welcome!

Hello, Medusahead, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions to the encyclopedia. If you need assistance, check out the Getting Help section below or place {{Help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by using four tildes (~~~~), which will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please always fill in the edit summary field to describe your edits. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 18:52, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started
Wikipedia's five pillars • A tutorial • Getting mentored How to: Edit a page • Upload and use images • Create your first article Article Creation Wizard
Getting help
Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments • Help desk • Teahouse • Help directory Request administrator attention
Policies and guidelines
Neutral point of view • No original research Verifiability • Reliable sources • Citing sources • Topic notability What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons List of policies • List of guidelines • Three-revert rule • Copyrights Image use policy • Policy for non-free content • Deletion policy External links • Spam • Vandalism • Conflict of interest • Sock puppetry

Writing articles
Be bold in editing • Develop an article • Simplified manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation The perfect article • Peer review • Featured content
The community
Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette Build consensus • Resolve disputes • No personal attacks • No legal threats Community portal • Village pump • Signpost • IRC channels
Miscellaneous
User pages • Talk pages • Portals Clean up: General • Spam • Vandalism Join a WikiProject • Translation Useful templates • Tools • User scripts Awards that registered contributors can achieve and award

Catherine of Siena lede

Hi there! Thanks for your interest in Catherine of Siena and her entry on WP. I've been doing a lot of work on her in my own research lately, and I very often come across claims that she was a Dominican Tertiary. Unfortunately, the Third Order of St Dominic did not come into being until after her death, so it was impossible for her to have been a member of it. She's sorta seen as the founding mother of the Third Order, so the confusion is totally understandable! This kind of conceptual patronage, and then lumping her in with the tradition she inspired, makes sense even if it isn't quite accurate. A good scholarly work on this is Luongo - Catherine of Siena monograph. It would be most accurate to describe her as a member of the "Mantellate", an informal network of pious laywomen without a formal rule or papal approbation. But for purposes of the lede I just changed it to "pious laywoman" since those are terms that most readers are likely to understand. Anyhow, let me know what you think about this - I've changed it a few times, and someone keeps changing it back. You most recently, so I thought I'd open up the discussion here. Feel free to move it to the Catherine of Siena talk page, though. Altenmaeren (talk) 18:51, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:57, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Scapular

Hello User:Medusahead, I hope this message finds you doing well. In your recent edit summary, you write that "a medal is a medal, the source says nothing else". However, the source, authored by the Paulist Fathers, actually does specifically mention the term "metal scapular"; upon clicking upon those words, one can clearly see an image of what is meant. I kindly ask that you will not revert, but rather, if you need any clarification, that you discuss it with me. Thank you for your understanding. With regards, Anupam^Talk 21:19, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your message, Anupam: In my humble opinion there is no such thing as a "metal scapular", since a scapular itself (in any size) is defined as a piece of cloth to be worn over the shoulders. Lateron, for the little scapulars there has been invented the possibility to wear a medal instead. So, what you (and the Paulist writer) mean is a Scapular medal. I suggest that we do not invent new terms but use the established ones. Friendly regards to you to, --Medusahead (talk) 08:22, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:Medusa, I can accept your compromise with one caveat—that we add the word "metal" before the word "scapular", with the word "medal" afterward, the latter being your suggestion and the former being mine. It will thus read "metal scapular medal", which is supported by the other reference. I trust that will be fine with you. As far as the "metal scapular", there are plenty of them available, as evidenced by a simple search on any search engine, as well as episodes on Catholic Answers dedicated to discussing them; the sources I provided meet WP:RS and hence, there is no reason to remove the information, especially because it's helpful to our readers, who may be curious about whether metal scapulars are licit. I hope this helps and that this compromise is acceptable to you. With regards, Anupam^Talk 14:37, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Re:List of Pontifically crowned images et al

Dear User:Medusahead, thanks for your message on my talk page. I appreciate that you seek my input with regard to handling an abusive user. For these kinds of edits, report the user to WP:AIV. If you gather a list of User:Lucifernam's problematic edit summaries, such as the one you provided, you can list them at WP:ANI and he will be blocked as his edit summaries consistently violate WP:NPA. Feel free to add in the WP:ANI discussion that you've consulted with me and ping me there so that I can comment. I hope this helps and trust that you will have a blessed Advent season that will start soon. With regards, Anupam^Talk 16:41, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome! It looks like the problematic editor was blocked as a result of the report. Kind regards, Anupam^Talk 00:56, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:53, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sacrament of Penance article

Greetings. Regarding your objection to my edit on the Sacrament of Penance article, the sacrament can be and often is just called "Reconciliation" or "Confession". I really don't see any need to say "Sacrament of ..." again at this point in the article. We don't insist on always using full or official names in articles when a common form of a name is also in frequent use. In any case the more official name, I believe, is the "Sacrament of Penance" so whether "Sacrament of Reconciliation" is also actually an official full name seems possibly arguable. Not worth an argument but something to think about. Regards, Afterwriting (talk) 12:06, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, and thank you for your message. However, as correspondingly expressed, in my opinion one could say in fact just "Confession" but not just "Reconciliation". Up to my knowledge, in ecclesiastical (con)texts it is always "the sacrament of reconciliation". But I agree, it is not worth arguing about it. Best regards, --Medusahead (talk) 09:24, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thank you for reaching out to our block-evading editor. If there was a barnstar for infinite patience, you should get it. Hope you don't mind my additional comments to yours. I just want to stop having to keep repeating the same edits. Really hope things become much more constructive than those block capital edit summaries. Thanks again, happy editing, Cardofk (talk) 11:27, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much, both for the barnstar and for your additional comments. I found them much more patient than mine… :} Happy editing 2U2.--Medusahead (talk) 07:34, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, well, sadly, it seems that our attempts to get him/her/them on side did not succeed and after another insulting comment, they got themselves banned, again. Cardofk (talk) 07:51, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Medusahead, sorry, yeah, this person is back editing all the usual articles under new name, ignoring calls for civility by calling people "stupid dog" in this edit to Feast of the Immaculate Conception. As this is a sockpuppet issue, do we add this to be investigated? Or do something for being abusive? Cardofk (talk) 09:33, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for notification, indeed apart from countless IPs this is another account of this editor. I would have this investigated, but from time to time I don't know the proceedings of that. --Medusahead (talk) 10:14, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks, I've added it to the old investigation, this person is clearly using a new account to be abusive and evade bans. Cardofk (talk) 10:39, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Civility Barnstar
	Well, it's not the infinite patience barnstar, but for sending personal greetings, not templating them, giving a second (or third) chance, you deserve this. Cardofk (talk) 12:34, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

RFC Invite

Mary, mother of Jesus has an RFC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. — That Coptic Guy (talk) 17:08, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:45, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Augustus Tolton

Hello @Medusahead. I am @Archer1234. I noticed your recent edit to Augustus Tolton where you removed the |titles= and |venerated_in= parameters and removed "US" from |death_place=, but you did not provide an explanation. Those parameters appeared to me to be used properly. Would you clarify why those changes were made? Thank you. — Archer1234 (t·c) 11:49, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I removed both titles and venerated in as non-applicable, since he is not yet beatified. (Only saints and beatified are venerated in liturgy.) For the U.S. after Illinois: that seemed obvious to me, but I can hand it back if you feel that should be mentioned.--Medusahead (talk) 11:53, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I understand now. Good points. Thanks. — Archer1234 (t·c) 09:22, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas á Jesu Order

Hi, thanks for the edits to Thomas á Jesu. Getting a little confused on who is OAD vs OCD. I tried to correct the "Not to be confused with..." statement but please confirm who's from which order. Referencer12 (talk) 14:11, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

When changing, I got a little bit confused myself ;), but it should fit now: Thomas of Jesus is a so-called Discalced Augustine (OAD), while Thomas a Jesu is a Discalced Carmelite (OCD). Hope this helps; --Medusahead (talk) 07:46, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

a Jesu

If you desire to revert then I will acquiescence since there’s no unity in the primary sources on what to call him, for some use de Jesu, a Jesu, à Jesu, etc. Okiyo9228 (talk) 04:10, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

see Ngram Okiyo9228 (talk) 04:13, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dressing- veiling

Dressing is the basis of veiling, and it is also a form part of it. Kaf Dağının Sırrı (talk) 09:23, 6 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nevertheless, as said, general remarks on the origin of clothing itself are not topic in an article of the very special theme of veiling. You should add these to the article clothing.--Medusahead (talk) 10:12, 6 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment

I did a quick look at your series of edits for the last couple days because they seemed quickly done and on some major topics, and couldn't find any to revert or discuss. You're good at this! Thanks for your edits at some of the spiritual and religious pages. Randy Kryn (talk) 08:32, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your kind comment. :)--Medusahead (talk) 10:26, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Venerated by" categories

Hey! So about those "venerated catholics by pope so-and-so" categories. In general the scheme seems to be that people are categorized by which pope promoted them to different stages in the process, which makes sense to me; sometimes one is interested in what saints a particular pope was favoring. This means that it's normal for a saint to have three tags: one for the pope who promoted them to Venerable, one for the pope who promoted them to Blessed, and one for the pope who promoted them to Saint. I see this on lots of existing pages (although more consistently for blessed+saint than for venerable). I don't think it makes sense to take off the "venerated by pope so-and-so" and "beatified by pope so-and-so" tags when someone gets through the final step in the process, and that in fact doesn't seem to be the general policy. — Moriwen (talk) 14:36, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Don't delete content on talk pages

Hello, I'm Nikolaj1905. I noticed that you deleted content posted by someone else on the talk page of the article on Saint. While you might not agree with the content that you deleted, the proper thing to do is to reply, not to delete. See WP:TPO. Nikolaj1905 (talk) 12:04, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the rules for discussion pages also state that posts that don't contain a question and don't contribute anything to improving the article can be deleted. The writer didn't even bother to read the lede of the article, despite the whole one, otherwise he would know that Catholics aren't believe "all their dead become saint, as this definition states".--Medusahead (talk) 09:14, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:58, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Teresa of Ávila

Hi Medusahead!

I noticed that the other day, when you reverted Cammoves's addition to the Teresa of Ávila article, you also reverted my removal of an seemingly non-notable self-published book. But your edit summary (doesn't meet the form of the others) seems to imply that you only intended to undo Cammoves's addition. Was this a mistake, or did you intend to undo my edit as well? If you did intend to, may I ask why? Smdjcl (talk) 03:50, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Smdjcl, thank your for bringing that up. Indeed, this addition has been done unintentionally – I don't know, how this happened. If I remember correctly, I just wanted to roll back the last edit. I apologise and removed the book again. Greetings, --Medusahead (talk) 08:51, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No problem! Things happen. All the best, Smdjcl (talk) 15:45, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Abbesses, mother superiors

Re: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Teresa_Janina_Kieroci%C5%84ska&diff=1210575244&oldid=1210546040 Mother superior redirects to abbess. But after your removals, Category:Polish Roman Catholic abbesses is about to be deleted. Something is not right here. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 10:52, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for giving that hint, I didn't know that Mother Superior simply redirects to abbess, which seems to be plain wrong. In this case we should rather have an article "Mother Superior" or something similar. The Carmelite nuns never had abbesses, they have prioresses (as they regard the BMV as their abbess). Usually, only the nuns of some of the old orders, such as Benededictines, Cistercians have abbesses, some of those orders (usually the mendicants, with the exception of the Poor Clares), have prioresses. The much younger religious congregations have other titles to refer to their superiors. The distinction is also one of canon law.

(Furthermore: a category with only two members seems also a case for deletion).--Medusahead (talk) 11:03, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the explanation. Perhaps you can consider writing an article on the concept of mother superior? _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:53, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I thought about it. ~~For now I have redirected "Mother superior" to the more fitting Superior general (Christianity).~~ Greetings, --Medusahead (talk) 11:57, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In response to this and an enquiry at the Redirections page, I wrote an article Mother superior. Feel free to contribute if you wish to. --Medusahead (talk) 10:37, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Holy Hour

Hello @Medusahead,

Concerning your reverting on the topic of the Holy Hour, you are stating "the Holy Hour goes back to a tradition based on the biblical event". While I understand the "inspiration" (as written in the article) is obviously the particular biblical event, could you please provide a source where we can see a tradition (as understood by the Church) of performing the Holy Hour prior to the revelations of Margaret Mary Alacoque in the Catholic Church ?

The tradition being based on that biblical event is in itself coming from these revelations, when Jesus refers to that particular moment of his life while instructing Alacoque on the meaning of this practice.

You also say "it is not referring to MM Alacoque", but this whole practice is coming from the revelations of MM Alacoque. I can understand maybe in some region of the world the link between MMA and the Holy Hour could have been lost, and is now only known as a tradition of an hour of Eucharistic Adoration. But if my statement is true, my whole emphasis of her is justified and is useful to restore the truth and share knowledge concerning the nature of the practice.

For example, in France (where it is coming from), that connection is still evident. Furthermore, in the History section of the article written by a previous user, we can read : "In 1829, the Archconfraternity of the Holy Hour was established by Père Robert Debrosse at Paray-le-Monial, Burgundy, France." This is the first Archconfraternity based on the Holy Hour and it was established in Paray-Le-Monial itself, where Alacoque received the revelation and where this practice was first promoted with indulgences.

When Pope Pius XI talked about the Holy Hour practice, he was also refering to Margaret Mary Alacoque revelations :

"For when Christ manifested Himself to Margaret Mary, and declared to her the infinitude of His love, at the same time, in the manner of a mourner, He complained that so many and such great injuries were done to Him by ungrateful men - and we would that these words in which He made this complaint were fixed in the minds of the faithful, and were never blotted out by oblivion: "Behold this Heart" - He said - "which has loved men so much and has loaded them with all benefits, and for this boundless love has had no return but neglect, and contumely, and this often from those who were bound by a debt and duty of a more special love." In order that these faults might be washed away, He then recommended several things to be done, and in particular the following as most pleasing to Himself, namely that men should approach the Altar with this purpose of expiating sin, making what is called a Communion of Reparation, - and that they should likewise make expiatory supplications and prayers, prolonged for a whole hour, - which is rightly called the "Holy Hour." These pious exercises have been approved by the Church and have also been enriched with copious indulgences."

Encyclical letter Miserentissimus Redemptor, May 8 1928 - Pope Pius XI

+ the "Communion of Reparation", so even my link to First Fridays Devotion is justified, having its source in the same revelations and being both reparations to the Sacred Heart.

To conclude, here is the evidence that the Holy Hour has it origins in MMA revelations :

"You will also receive communion on the first Friday of every month; and every night from Thursday to Friday, I'll make you partake of that mortal sadness I so wished to feel in the Garden of Olives; which sadness will reduce you, without your being able to understand it, to a kind of agony harder to bear than death. And to accompany me in this humble prayer which I then presented to my Father amidst all my anguish, you will rise between eleven and midnight, to prostrate yourself for an hour with me, face down, so as to appease the divine wrath, by asking for mercy for sinners, as well as to soften in some way the bitterness I felt at the abandonment of my apostles, which forced me to reproach them for not having been able to watch with me for an hour, and during this hour you will do what I will teach you."

Vie et Œuvres de Marguerite-Marie Alacoque, T.II, p.72

"Once, this Sovereign of my soul commanded me to keep vigil every night from Thursday to Friday, for one hour, prostrated against the ground with him, and that he would teach me what he desired of me, and that it was also to make amends for that hour of which he complained, in the Garden of Olives, that his Apostles had not kept vigil for one hour with him."

Letter 133, Vie et Œuvres de Marguerite-Marie Alacoque, T.II, p.573-574 Pisteau (talk) 16:51, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Pisteau, Thanks for writing. I'll be happy to look for other relevant sources, please give me time until the course of next week. Greetings, --Medusahead (talk) 10:44, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Medusahead, hope you're doing great. Thank you for replying back to my previous message. Coming back at this, did you find anything about the Holy Hour being found prior to MMA revelations? If not I would like to add some more informations about this and make an emphasis on the connection between the Holy Hour and the devotion to the Sacred Heart. I would edit your current version and you could review it if needed. Looking forward your reply. Thanks. Pisteau (talk) 11:31, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Citation Barnstar

Thanks for participating in the June 2024 backlog drive!

You scored 408 points while adding citations to articles during WikiProject Reliability's first {{citation needed}} backlog drive, earning you this citation barnstar. Thanks for helping out!