User talk:AndyBVolcom

November 2014

Hello, I'm NeilN. I wanted to let you know that I removed one or more external links you added to the page Guerrilla marketing, because they seemed to be inappropriate for an encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page, or take a look at our guidelines about links. Thank you. NeilN ^{talk to me} 19:06, 14 November 2014 (UTC) How was an Article about Guerilla Marketing not a resource. Especially when Google's Android just teamed up with Kit Kat to launch a guerilla marketing campaign. And there is link in the refenreces section that has nothing to do with guerilla marketing http://www.media-street.co.uk/marketing/ NeilN[reply]

Please do not add or significantly change content without citing verifiable and reliable sources, as you did with this edit to Guerrilla marketing. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Tataryn (talk) 21:52, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

December 2015

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Blue Fountain Media. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include, but are not limited to, links to personal websites, links to websites with which you are affiliated (whether as a link in article text, or a citation in an article), and links that attract visitors to a website or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Because Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by most search engines. If you feel the link should be added to the page, please discuss it on the associated talk page rather than re-adding it. Thank you. Apparition¹¹ ^Complaints/Mistakes 00:59, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Problems with upload of File:David-Lazarus-Los-Angeles-Times-Business-Columnist.png

Thanks for uploading File:David-Lazarus-Los-Angeles-Times-Business-Columnist.png. You don't seem to have said where the image came from, who created it, or what the copyright status is. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 06:05, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging for File:Ted-x-Santa-cruz-logo.png

Thanks for uploading File:Ted-x-Santa-cruz-logo.png. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 00:05, 23 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:David-Lazarus-Los-Angeles-Times-Business-Columnist.png

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:David-Lazarus-Los-Angeles-Times-Business-Columnist.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. --Animalparty! (talk) 05:14, 26 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Vab Media Digital Agency, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Santa Cruz. 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) 09:47, 21 April 2016 (UTC)1[reply]

Nomination of TEDxSanta Cruz for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article TEDxSanta Cruz 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 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/TEDxSanta Cruz 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. --Animalparty! (talk) 17:56, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Vab-media-digital-agency-logo.png listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Vab-media-digital-agency-logo.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination.

ATTENTION: This is an automated, bot-generated message. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 23:50, 14 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

February 2018

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Katie^talk 00:00, 3 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]