User talk:MiguelJoseErnst

Hello, ! I'm ulayiti, and I'd like to welcome you to Wikipedia! Thanks for your contributions, and I hope you'll like the place enough to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
 * The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style
 * How to avoid common mistakes

When commenting on talk pages or voting, you should always sign your name by typing in four tildes (&#126;&#126;&#126;&#126;). This way people will know who made the comment and can respond to you. If you have any questions at all, feel free to ask me on my talk page. You can also have a look at the help pages or put up a question at the village pump. Welcome to Wikipedia, and happy editing! - ulayiti (talk)  22:33, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

High and Sung Mass
Hi there. I did some work on Sung Mass and looked at High Mass as well. I couldn't help but notice some odd parallels:
 * The Sung Mass is in many ways an aberration. It was intended for use in non-Catholic countries where the services of a deacon or a subdeacon (or clergy to fill these parts in the ceremony of the Mass) were not easily had. It was intended to be used in place of Solemn Mass on Sundays and major feast days.
 * The High Mass is in many ways an aberration. It was intended for use in non-Catholic countries where the services of a deacon & subdeacon (or clergy to fill these parts in the ceremony of the Mass) were not easily had. It was intended to be used in place of Solemn Mass on Sundays and major feast days.

As a layman, I find all the different masses quite confusing. Can we have some overview or something? Also, some might say that calling them "aberration" is subjective. Rl 20:05, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the explanation. Maybe you can briefly explain the term so the laymen (most people who use Wikipedia) understands the meaning of this term in this context (something like "was in many ways an aberration and was not approved by the Holy See until about two hundred years ago.") ? Oh, and since you seem to be a rare expert on the subject, can you add a reference or two so readers and other editors know where they can learn more? Rl 07:06, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

I fixed your user page, your Spanish needs more work Conquistador. Don't be discouraged though!--4.245.215.112 07:09, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on The Red & the Blue, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template   to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Realkyhick 18:30, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Penn_pennant.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Penn_pennant.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 10:51, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Assumption of Mary
Hi, you are probably right about the image. Please see the talk page there, and provide a reference if available. Thanks. History2007 (talk) 13:44, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Fight on, Pennsylvania!
Please do not re-add the lyrics to this article. As you note in the article, the lyrics are copyrighted and copyrighted material cannot be added to Wikipedia - see the Terms of Use you agreed to when you created the article. Thanks, Sparthorse (talk) 19:10, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Then how are people supposed to know what the lyrics are? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MiguelJoseErnst (talk • contribs)
 * You could link to a site that has the lyrics on them, if one exists, or reference a book that contains them. However you must not add copyrighted material to Wikipedia articles. Continuing to do so is disruptive and could lead to you being blocked from editing, to protect the encyclopedia. Thanks, Sparthorse (talk) 19:15, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Sadly, none of the school's websites have the full lyrics. BUT, I just did some double checking. "The Houston Club" was disbanded in 1929 and replaced by the Houston Hall Board--a separate entity. http://www.archives.upenn.edu/histy/features/studtorg/stugovt/housclub.html (paragraph 11). The name is sometimes used as a nickname for the student union (the wiki article on Houston Hall confirms this), but the corporate entity legally bearing that name no longer exists. The book I quoted from was published in 1924. If the Houston Club was abolished in 1929 then the copyright could not have been renewed. According to Cornell's Copyright Information Center website (http://copyright.cornell.edu/resources/publicdomain.cfm), the song is now be in the public domain. I will put the lyrics back up, but with an explanation. If you deem this is not enough, then I assume you will remove it and I will leave it be until I can find out any more.

Nomination of Fight on, Pennsylvania! for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Fight on, Pennsylvania! is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Fight on, Pennsylvania! until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article.  P G Pirate  23:23, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Ivy League
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Ivy League. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement. Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states: In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. While edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount and can lead to a block, breaking the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. DMacks (talk) 05:56, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

I have cited a source for my edits. The person who has made changes has not.


 * You will need to get WP:CONSENSUS, not just assume that the ref you found is not easily disputed by the other editor based on some ref he will post (or that someone else will). As it says, "Do not edit war even if you believe you are right." DMacks (talk) 06:12, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

I have disputed the neutrality of the article based on the order of alphabetization. It shows a bias toward Princeton.

Your recent edits
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either: This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.
 * 1) Add four tildes  ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment; or
 * 2) With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button (Insert-signature.png or Signature icon.png) located above the edit window.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 06:20, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:08, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:33, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Latin Mass


The article Latin Mass has been proposed for deletion. The proposed deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.