User talk:Andrew Zito

Go feel /fill up your own pages with that garbage and dont delete my comments there then maybe comment here by you would be respectful.

Pubic Dominus Electus Erectus

Image:Jules dassin 07.jpg
Greetings. I have listed Image:Jules dassin 07.jpg on Images and media for deletion because it has no source or licensing information, and it's not listed in any articles. If you would like this image to be kept, please add source and licensing information, and include it in an article. If you need any help with this, just ask me. Thanks! – Quadell (talk) (sleuth) 22:22, Mar 8, 2005 (UTC)

Category:Berklee alumni
I noticed that you have this category on your user page. This category has been moved and renamed to Category:Berklee College of Music alumni. This category is reserved for articles in the namespace, namely for articles of notable alumni of Berklee College of Music who meet the criteria of WP:MUSIC and/or WP:BIO. However, I would like to create Category:Wikipedians who are Berklee College of Music alumni (I am one myself, but am not notable enough for an article in the namespace) and move the Berklee alumni category there. Would you like to help me with this endeavor? -- User:Malber (talk • contribs) 16:35, 9 February 2006 (UTC)



has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile to others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk pages. Happy editing!

Wiki used in the same conjunction with love is an OXYMORON LIKE YOU --Andrew Zito 03:19, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Your comments on Abraham Lincoln Brigade "talk" page
Just a suggestion: comments WRITTEN IN ALL CAPS are the written equivalent of SHOUTING, make you look like a crank, and will probably result in your comments being completely ignored.

Like I said, just a suggestion, which you are free to take or ignore. +ILike2BeAnonymous 20:08, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

I RESENT THE INSINUATION THAT WRITING IN CAPS IS EQUILAVENT TO SHOUTING IF FIND IT EASIER TO WRITE AND SEE TEXT IN CAPS, AND THAT SOME CAN DICTATE SUCH ARBITRARY STANDARDS CAPS ARE GREAT THEY ARE CLEAR AND EASY TO SEE! NOW SIGN THE PETITION TO GET THE ABRAHAM LINCOLN BRIGADE VETS RECOGNITION AND BENEFITS LIKE ALL OTHER US VETS --Andrew Zito 20:32, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. One or more of your recent edits have been considered unhelpful or unconstructive and have been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. A link to the edit I have reverted can be found here: link. If you believe this edit should not have been reverted, please contact me. ROASTY TOAST  20:46, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I removed your comment because a discussion goes on the talk page or as a hidden comment. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Roastytoast (talk • contribs) 20:48, 11 May 2007 (UTC).

Your edit to Sturmabteilung
Please do not add unhelpful and unconstructive content to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox.  Clyde  (a.k.a Mystytopia) 20:52, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

SCREW YOU AND WIKIPEDIA I WILL BLOG IT ON MY OWN SITES AND TELL THE WORLD WHAT IDIOTS YOU ARE--Andrew Zito 20:55, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Block
You have been blocked from editing for in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for. Please stop. You're welcome to make useful contributions after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text below. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 01:47, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Yeah in the the one minute after I posted you read it thought about it and said duh I don't know what the fuk--Andrew Zito 03:05, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Call it skimming. Your critique is certainly lengthy, and you may even bring up some good points, but it does not constitute an unblock request in any form I can recognize. As I said, please address the reasons for your block, if you plan on posting another request. – Luna Santin  (talk) 03:07, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

GO BECOME SUCK UP TO THE BAR AS A LIZARDLAWYER I'm an idiot I wouldn't waste the time of talking to you Id take the bullet first and bury you:

So here are some more reasons keep your legalisms to yourself the general publc has enough trouble with the legal system not to need your contrived self-serving cjiquous superflous arbitration system go read what I write on my blogs to burn WIKIPEDIA as it is a error from the word go and we know which side it is on the wrong one so screw your legal tricks and circular logics we hav e better things to do.

http://blog.360.yahoo.com/andrew_zito


 * "Wikipedia: A Million Monkeys Typing" Editorial note from Workers Vanguard, biweekly newspaper of the Spartacist League/US
 * "Communiqué from Wikiality" Letter and response from Workers Vanguard on Wikipedia
 * The Book Stops Here Wired News article
 * Microsoft's step into Wikipedia prompts debate
 * Wiki wars, an article on Red Herring about contentious articles on Wikipedia (registration required)
 * The Messiness of WikiDemocracy - by M.R.M. Parrott. Over-all positive but discusses some problems
 * WikiTruth A non-public Wiki covering supposed abuse of Wikipedia by its own users and admins
 * Wikiwatch
 * Dated links

By the way IF WIKIPEDIA BLOCKS ME PERMANENTLY I WOULD CONSIDER IT A BADGE OF HONOR AS MANY OTHERS WOULD FOR YOU ARE CONSIDERED POORLY BY HONEST INTELLECTS--Andrew Zito 03:21, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

FINAL INTELLECTUAL ARGUMENT AGAINST WIKIPEDIA IT AS OF THIS MOMENT TODAY WIKIPEDIA CONTINUES TO CENSOR AND OPPRESS ME WHILE REFUSING TO CORRECT ITS OWN ARTICLES IN CONTRADICTION, SO IF YOU DON'T WISH TO CAREFULLY READ WHAT I WROTE ALREADY ON THOSE ISIUES NOR APOLOGY AND INSTEAD ASK FOR LEGALISTIC ARGUMENTS I PITY YOUR DUMB ASS FOR WIKIPEDIA HAS NO INTEGRITY AT ALL AND DESERVES WHAT EVER HELL IT GETS--Andrew Zito 03:27, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
 * After a closer look at this account's contributions, I've extended the block. It is now indefinite. In addition, I've protected this talk page for 24 hours. Please calm down, stop shouting, and prepare yourself for reasonable conversation before posting further. You're welcome to criticize Wikipedia, me, or other users as much as you like, but if you're not here to contribute to the wiki, then that seems to be that. Thank you for your time and consideration. – Luna Santin  (talk) 03:33, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

I am calmed but since you and the petty borgeois libertarian rightist trash controling Wikipedia has no cognitive understanding of English or any other language allow me to explain it to you in a short common expression "GO SCREW YOUR SELF YOURSELVES" for your solutions are not real solutions but reactionary vulgar authoritarian hypocrisy that allows you tp block people when you yourselves can present any sodomit travesty as you do read my blog you are now vying for the #1 spots of idiots. Again go screw yourself wikipedia is a waste of any serious learned person's time and efforts--Andrew Zito 04:14, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

(REMOVE THE BLOCK - WIKIPEDIA continues to maintain a bizarre and inconsistent policy of decentralized callous disregard and disrespect of individual rights by their manner of obstructing valid uses of its services that values form over substance. While WIKIPEDIA maintains its own inconsistencies, distortions, hypocrisies it had punitively treated this user Andrew Zito when he drew public attention to incorrect WIKIPEDIA actions without WIKIPEDIA ever addressing those distortions they created that makes WIKIPEDIA the butt joke of any creditable institution: As such WIKIPEDIA should reverse its actions and remove the block of this user so as to address the matter in the spirit of what it claims rather than stubbornly sticking to the abusive form it has taken. At present WIKIPEDIA is in at least in two siginificant articles perpetuating historical revisionism on a grand scale.--Xaoskeller 22:59, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:Melina never on sunday 003.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Melina never on sunday 003.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rossrs 13:39, 1 July 2007 (UTC)