Talk:Water volleyball

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)
 * 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)
 * will take a closer look later- am currently bivvyng up a very boggy mountain top. Nick Moyes (talk) 07:16, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
 * 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)

New editing effort
Hello Nick Moyes -- An IP SPA is back at it, editing Water volleyball. Protection may be appropriate. See also Xiphoid process, Swimming stroke, Figure of speech Rhadow (talk) 17:39, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks - I've taken a look around and cleaned out some uncited 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)

Old editing effort
My articles have millions of views, and this Nick with only one book on Botany, after 20 years in Museum, i have article also on Museum, stared to delete Trump, Figures of Speech from Journal of Advanced Rhetoric, my work with Pulitzers, Nobel winners, or Water Volleyball Journal, or Swimming Strokes while we are making project in Human Kinetics, with Human Kinetic' author. Assumption of Nick and his fellow vandals, is that this is under his influence or your in wikipedia. So he is suggesting you, and you initiated millions of views of my articles. That is only to speak about wikipedia. Cheers!--79.101.253.148 (talk) 11:14, 9 December 2017 (UTC)