This article is within the scope of WikiProject Volleyball, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Volleyball on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.VolleyballWikipedia:WikiProject VolleyballTemplate:WikiProject VolleyballVolleyball
This article was nominated for deletion on 8 November 2017. The result of the discussion was keep.
Wholly inadequate sources
At a recent WP:AfD discussion concerning the article, I felt the need to leave the following comments on the unreliable nature of sources included in this article, as follows: "...However, I do have serious concerns about the sourcing as I am seeing a number of likely sock puppet accounts adding in references in various articles, all linked to one particular self-publishing writer. In this article no-one seems to have spotted that for two years we've had an ostensibly serious journal being referenced twice, when Water Volleyball Journal is nothing but a home-made wordpress blog with no significant content. The same goes for the so-called World Association of Water Volleyball Clubs, another cheap wordpress blog created by the same person/sock. All this rubbish needs to go, but not the article itself." I hope editors with an interest in this subject will look very carefully at the rest of its content and especially the mention of all 'official' organisations said to be connected with it. Some good references would be welcome, too. Regards from the UK Nick Moyes (talk) 01:32, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Nick Moyes -- You got it. All bun, no meat. After all the ink spilled on the AfD, not a single change. And I found more mischief -- vandalism that easily passes ClueBot and most humans too. All the best. Rhadow (talk) 01:33, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I have stripped out a lot of the content added by likely sock puppet and COI accounts. References to two imaginary world organisations has been deleted, as discussed at AfD. No content should ever be reinserted based on a self-published 'book' by Lepota Cosmo, as this is not regarded as a WP:RS, and there is a significant WP:COI here. Nick Moyes (talk) 08:47, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks - I've taken a look around and cleaned out some incited nonsense. Interesting edits from one IP on Figure of speech on both en. and nl.wiki. (BTW: do be careful what words you choose to use in some of your edit summaries.) Protection is only really appropriate for repeated and frequent vandalism. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:44, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
