Draft:Sci tech conference feedbacks

Draft article not currently submitted for review.

This is a draft Articles for creation (AfC) submission. It is not currently pending review. While there are no deadlines, abandoned drafts may be deleted after six months. To edit the draft click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.

To be accepted, a draft should:

Show the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article by using multiple sources that meet four criteria. The sources should be (1) reliable (2) secondary (3) independent of the subject (4) talk about the subject in some depth. For some topics, there are alternative criteria.
Be written from a neutral point of view
Respect copyright and do not plagiarize. Do not copy-paste.

It is strongly discouraged to write about yourself, your business or employer. If you do so, you must declare it.

Where to get help

If you need help editing or submitting your draft, please ask us a question at the AfC Help Desk or get live help from experienced editors. These venues are only for help with editing and the submission process, not to get reviews.
If you need feedback on your draft, or if the review is taking a lot of time, you can try asking for help on the talk page of a relevant WikiProject. Some WikiProjects are more active than others so a speedy reply is not guaranteed.

How to improve a draft

Wikipedia:Contributing to Wikipedia – a basic overview on how to edit Wikipedia.
Help:Wikitext – how to use the markup
Help:Referencing for beginners – how to include references
Wikipedia:Article development – how to develop your article
Wikipedia:Writing better articles – how to improve your article
Wikipedia:Verifiability – make sure your article includes reliable third-party sources

You can also browse Wikipedia:Featured articles and Wikipedia:Good articles to find examples of Wikipedia's best writing on topics similar to your proposed article.

Improving your odds of a speedy review

To improve your odds of a faster review, tag your draft with relevant WikiProject tags using the button below. This will let reviewers know a new draft has been submitted in their area of interest. For instance, if you wrote about a female astronomer, you would want to add the Biography, Astronomy, and Women scientists tags.

Add tags to your draft

Editor resources

Easy tools: Citation bot (help) | Advanced: Fix bare URLs

Last edited by Bkkhann (talk | contribs) 5 months ago. (Update)

Submit the draft for review!

Sci-Tech Conference Scam Review

The Sci-Tech Conference, hosted through the website [scitechconference.org](https://scitechconference.org/), has come under scrutiny for failing to deliver the promised services and exploiting participants financially.

Background

The conference has been accused of scamming participants for years. One notable case involved an individual who paid $1050 USD to participate in a conference seven years ago, but received no publication or academic recognition in return. Despite assurances from the conference organizers, nothing materialized, and participants were left without any support or acknowledgment.

Contact Information

The conference organizers have provided several ways for participants to reach them, but these platforms have raised suspicion due to the lack of transparency and accountability:

**Website**: [1](https://scitechconference.org/)
**WhatsApp Group**:

+919888650222

**Telegram Channels**:

 - [Channel 1](https://t.me/+ISBFi6cOHnwxMDk0)
 - [Channel 2](https://t.me/+ISBFi6cOHnwxMDk0)
 - [Channel 3](https://t.me/+ISBFi6cOHnwxMDk0)
 - [Channel 4](https://t.me/+ISBFi6cOHnwxMDk0)

**YouTube Channel**: [International Scientific Research](https://www.youtube.com/@internationalscientificres2534/featured)

Allegations of Mismanagement and Fraud

Many individuals have reported similar experiences of being scammed by the Sci-Tech Conference, with no publications or recognitions issued after payments were made. The lack of follow-up or response from the organizers has raised serious concerns over the legitimacy of the conference. It appears that the event organizers have been consistently misrepresenting their services and exploiting people who are eager to showcase their research.

The platforms listed above, such as WhatsApp, Telegram, and YouTube, have been used to promote the conference and recruit new participants, but these channels do not offer any meaningful interaction or resolutions for those who have been wronged.

Conclusion

Given the repeated allegations of fraud and the lack of accountability from the Sci-Tech Conference organizers, it is highly advised that potential participants thoroughly research and consider the risks before committing any payments. Many have already fallen victim to this scheme, and it remains important to raise awareness about these issues.

References