Pluto desdemona 134340

Week 8 Peer Edit:

Privacy means that people should refrain from open everything to the public. Personal activities cannot be specifically traced if that tracing caused physical and mental harm to the people. Because of the existence of privacy, the activities of the government and certain community groups are restricted.[1] Article Translation 2[edit] The 2010 Baidu domain name hijacking incident happened on January 12, 2010. On the same day, Baidu, China's largest Chinese search engine company, was hacked by a group claiming to be the Iran Cyber Army, preventing Internet users from accessing Baidu's website for eight hours. This incident was the most serious server failure which caused Baidu direct losses of more than 7 million yuan. Category 1 Event process 2 after the incident 3 Impact 4 References 5 External links Event process On January 12, 2010, at 7:40 a.m. (UTC-8:00 a.m.), some internet users noticed an anomaly in Baidu's home page landing. After 8 a.m., in most parts of the Chinese mainland and the United States, Europe, and other places people cannot normally access Baidu's website. Baidu domain name baidu.com in the WHOIS information NS service group was changed for no reason. The site's domain name was replaced by Yahoo's two domain name servers, modified on January 11, 2010. Some internet users also found that the site page was tampered with a black background and the Iranian flag, along with the words "This site has been hacked by Iranian Cyber Army" (the site has been invaded by the Iranian cyber army) and a paragraph of Arabic text. The page then jumped to the English Yahoo home page, but still was accessed using Baidu IP address http://202.108.22.5/ for a normal landing. At 8:30 a.m., internet users said that the domain name had been temporarily restored to the original server, but WHOIS data had not yet been recovered. Although Baidu had repeatedly revised the domain name server address, it had been tampered with by hackers to "hostgator.com" for a long time. At 9:10 a.m., the page appears to be "This account is suspended" (the account has been suspended). At 9:15 a.m., according to the website IP analysis, the original Baidu website home page server has failed. The display of the Image of the Iranian Net Army is located in the "pink2.warez-host.com" providing offshore hosting services, while the website data processing center is located in Iran, the Netherlands, and Germany. Baidu, on the other hand, said it did not understand the cause of the failure. At 9:40 a.m., Baidu said the fault had been resolved and services could return to normal in a short time. At 10:54 a.m., Baidu stated that the fault had been largely eliminated, but that the domain name server had been tampered with several times by hackers. At 11:30, the Beijing area people can normally log in to Baidu's home page, the second-level page also begins to resume one after another. At 2 p.m., the Baidu homepage completely returned to normal, all over the normal landing, but Baidu space, Baidu paste bar, etc. have not yet recovered. At 4 p.m., all Baidu services were repaired. Afterward Hours after the incident, Baidu did not respond positively to the incident. Robin Li, Baidu's founder, chairman, and chief executive called the incident "unprecedented" in his Baidu post. It has been reported that the "Taiwan Baidu" website (www.baidu.com.tw) issued a notice three hours after the incident that the site was damaged by people with a heart, the host was paralyzed. But some experts say Baidu in Taiwan does not belong to Baidu. At 10:54 a.m. that day, Baidu officially responded to the incident. Baidu said the incident was caused by Baidu's domain name www.baidu.com was illegally tampered with at the registrar of U.S. domain names, making it inaccessible to users around the world. Enable alternate domain names immediately after an event and coordinate with the domain name registrar. On the other hand, it calls for vigilance against the current phenomenon of DNS domain name server hijacking and to improve the construction of this area. The incident caused the Chinese mainland to be unable to log on to Baidu's website for a long time, "Baidu" and "Baidu blacked out" and other keywords to become Google's hot list of the fastest rise keywords. China Internet Information Center after the incident at Baidu's request to include the website domain name in the focus of detection and protection. The Iranian embassy said the Iranian cyber-army involved in the incident did not represent Iran's official position. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China expressed its firm opposition to cybercrime, including hacking. Iran's cyber-army invaded the U.S. dating site Twitter on December 18, 2009, using the same tactics as the domain name hijacking, saying on its page after the invasion that Iran could control the network and asking the U.S. not to provoke Iranians. On January 13, the State Internet Emergency Response Center issued a notice that the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology of the People's Republic of China held an expert seminar with Baidu, basic telecommunications operators, the National Computer Network Emergency Technology Processing Coordination Center, and the China Internet Information Center at 1 p.m. on January 12 to determine Baidu domain name baidu.com the registration of "register.com" in the United States domain name registrar, the incident occurred because Baidu's domain name registration information was illegally tampered with. The domain name resolution was misdirected, making Baidu's website inaccessible to users worldwide. On the other hand, important information systems departments and Internet enterprises are required to use as much as possible. CN is the primary domain name and must also be registered with a qualified domain name registration service. Effect After the incident, a self-proclaimed Chinese red guest netizen called for a counter-attack on the Iranian website. Subsequently, the website of the Iranian Broadcasting University (iribu.ir) was attacked, the page appeared on black screen after the attack on Baidu's website, followed by the words "Long live the People's Republic of China of China" (Long live people of the People's Republic of China). Several Iranian government websites have been hacked by Chinese hackers. Media analysis, the incident occurred in the morning during the peak network use, server failure will cause Baidu to lose more than 7 million yuan. China has commented that pro-government elements in Iran retaliated against Chinese netizens for supporting the opposition by hijacking Baidu's domain name. There are also comments that the Iranian cyber invasion may be the United States to leave China-Iran relations behavior. Definition[edit][edit] The 2014 China Network Anomaly incident refers to a widespread network failure incident that occurred in the afternoon of January 21 in mainland China in 2014. Due to an abnormality in the resolution of China's common top-level domain names, many website domain names are resolved to completely unresponsive IP address 65.49.2.178, owned by Dynamic Internet Technology, a North Carolina-based company that develops wall-turning software such as Liberty Gate. The incident is thought to be a hacker attack, which the company denies. It has also been reported that the incident was caused by the failure of the Great Wall of Fire Prevention in the course of the removal of errors. Process[edit][edit] At 9 am on January 21st, the failure of the Tencent network prevented the normal function of many services. [1] But Tencent later said the failure was due to a problem with the computer room network. [3] At about 15:10 on January 21st, there was an anomaly in the resolution of China's generic top-level domain name. Many of the access to .com, .org, and .net sites were resolved to the wrong IP address, 65.49.2.178, affecting about two-thirds of the country's websites, while the .cn site was not affected. [3] [4] At 1650 hours, most of the sites were back to normal, but it would take about 12 hours to eliminate the impact. [6] Baidu's sub-domain name n.baidu.com was found to have the name "catch me if you can" (Chinese: catch me if you can), but the relevance of the hack or this incident was uncertain. [4] The source code on the front page of DNS service provider DNSPod's official website was found to include snedo-content, but DNSPod said via the official microblog that the content was eggs. [7] Investigation[edit][edit] Investigation IP address 65.49.2.178 is owned by Dynamics Internet Technology, which has developed wall-turning software Free gate. The Internet network security platform Dark Cloud revealed on Weibo that after their investigation, the IP's network had sent spam and carried out other politically motivated hacking operations, and security experts at Jinshan Drug Lord believed that the IP had been hacked. China's National Internet Emergency Center said on January 22 that the failure was caused by a cyberattack on the root domain name server. [9] In an interview with Bloomberg News, Mr. Ye Xuxuan, chairman of the Hong Kong Internet Providers Association, said the incident was due to the unlikelihood of an attack on the root domain name server. It is difficult to attack all of China's root domain name servers at the same time, and that if only some of the root domain name servers were attacked, the network crash would only be local. Besides, some cybersecurity sources believe that this attack is beyond the scope of the average hacker's ability to attack, may be related to the main network set-up adjustments. Dong Fang, an engineer at Cyber Security Defenders, also made a possible assumption, saying it was also possible that domestic operators had made adjustments or had some restrictions on some lines. [12] Reuters reported that the incident was caused by a fault in a project to remove the Great Wall of Fire. [13] Bill Xia, chairman of Dynamics Internet Technology, also denied that his company had carried out the attack and blamed the FireWall for the incident. [14] Professor Xiao Qiang of the University of California, Berkeley, investigated and believed that the Great Wall of Fire caused the incident. The anti-censorship website GreatFire.org "decisive evidence" that the Great Wall of Fire caused the incident. If the event is because the root domain name server in China is contaminated, then the use of an unsponsored domain name server should be resolved to the correct IP address. However, GreatFire.org's published drawings show that the query for unsoiled domain name servers in China during the event still resolves to the incorrect IP address 65.49.2.178. Therefore, the parsing error does not originate from China's root domain name server is contaminated, but comes from China's Great Wall of Fire. [16] [14] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Icherishyou (talk • contribs) 00:06, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Overall: It is encyclopedic as the information presented in the article is clear and comprehensive.

Hi!

Hello, Pluto desdemona 134340, Hi this is Jojo11234 your groupmate in I-PLP. Looking for a great semester!

Welcome!

Hello, Pluto desdemona 134340, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Ian and I work with Wiki Education; I help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment.

I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please check out the student training library, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users. Below are some resources to help you get started editing.

Handouts
Choosing an article to edit Editing an article • Add images to articles Citing sources on Wikipedia
Additional Resources
You can find answers to many student questions in our FAQ.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 00:34, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

Talk Page Introduction Assignment

Hi, I hope the semester is going well! This is one of your group members from the I-PLP. I hope this actually goes to your talk page but we'll see. Anyways, this semester seems like it'll be really exciting with this project and I look forward to collaborating with you and seeing the work everyone is able to do. Best of luck and I hope it's a good experience for you! --GoatCheesePizza (talk) 04:20, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

Internet anomalies in mainland China in 2014 moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Internet anomalies in mainland China in 2014, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Lopifalko (talk) 05:43, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Peer Review

For clarification, the things that I put a parenthesis around are my suggestions and they correspond to whatever is in front of them. Of course they're just suggestions and by no means are the correct answer.

The 2014 China Network Anomaly incident refers to a widespread network failure incident that occurred in(on) the afternoon of january 21 Chinese mainland 2014 in China(says China twice, maybe only doing it once would make sentence more clear). Due to an abnormality in the resolution of china's(capitalize) common top-level domain names, many website domain names are resolved to (a) completely unresponsive IP address 65.49.2.178. (The) IP address 65.49.2.178 is owned by Dynamic Internet Technology, a North Carolina-based company that develops wall-turning software such as Liberty Gate, so the incident is thought to be a hacker attack, which the company denies(possibly make this a separate sentence). It has also been reported that the incident was caused by the failure of the Great Wall of Fire Prevention in the course of the removal of errors. Directory 1 pass 2 Survey 3 Comment 4 Reference source After(A little unclear what these mean) On January 21st, at 9 a.m., Tencent's network failure prevented many services from being delivered properly. [1] But(maybe removed but for clarity) Tencent later said the failure was due to a problem with the computer room network. [3] At about 15:10 on January 21st, there was an anomaly in the resolution of China's generic top-level domain name, and many of the access to .com, .org and .net sites was resolved to the wrong IP address, 65.49.2.178, affecting about two-thirds of the country's websites, while the .cn site was not affected.(could be split up into a couple sentences) [3] [4] At 1650 hours(writing both times with the same form would probably be good), most of the sites were back to normal, but it would take about 12 hours to completely eliminate the impact. [6] Baidu's sub-domain name n.baidu.com was found to have the catch me if you can( this could be a technical term, but if its not its not clear what this mean) (Chinese: Come and get me), but it's not certain if it's related to the hack or this incident. [4] The source code on the front page of DNS service provider DNSPod's official website was found to include snedo-content(potential misspell), but DNSPod said via the official microblog that the content was eggs. [7] (The) Investigation IP address 65.49.2.178 is owned by Dynamics Internet Technology, which has (the) developed wall-turning software Freegate. The Internet network security platform Dark Cloud revealed on Weibo that after their investigation, the IP's network had sent spam and carried out other politically motivated hacking operations, and security experts at Jinshan Drug Lord believed that the IP had been hacked(maybe split into two sentences). China's National Internet Emergency Center said on January 22 that the failure was caused by a cyber attack on the root domain name server. [9] In an interview with Bloomberg News, Mr. Ye Xuxuan, chairman of the Hong Kong Internet Providers Association, said the incident was due to the unlikelihood of an attack on the root domain name server, which is difficult to attack all of China's root domain name servers at the same time, and that if only some of the root domain name servers were attacked, the network crash would only be local(long sentence makes it harder to follow, could be split up). In addition, some cybersecurity sources believe that this attack is beyond the scope of the average hacker's ability to attack, (and) may be related to the main network set-up adjustments. Dong Fang, an engineer at Cyber Security Defenders, also made a possible assumption, saying it was also possible that domestic operators had made adjustments or had some restrictions on some lines. [12] Reuters reported that the incident was caused by a fault in a project to remove the Great Wall of Fire. [13] Bill Xia, chairman of Dynamics Internet Technology, also denied that his company had carried out the attack and blamed the FireWall for the incident. [14] Professor Xiao Qiang of the University of California, Berkeley, investigated and believed that the Great Wall of Fire caused the incident. The anti-censorship website GreatFire.org (i think a word is missing here) "decisive evidence" that the Great Wall of Fire caused the incident. If the event is because( could replace with “due to” to sound more formal) the root domain name server in China is contaminated, then the use of an unsponsored domain name server should be resolved to the correct IP address. However, GreatFire.org's published drawings show that the query for unsoiled domain name servers in China during the event still resolves to the incorrect IP address 65.49.2.178. Therefore, the parsing error does not originate from China's root domain name server is(being) contaminated, but should come from China's Great Wall of Fire. [16] [14]

Lead Guiding questions: Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?

       Yes the lead includes a main sentence that very appropriately describes the article’s topic. It isn’t too long and doesn’t try to cover too much.

Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?

       The article is organized into paragraphs, but no specific section titles are included. That being said, the lead does briefly introduce the most important information that is covered in the article.

Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?

       No.

Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

       The lead is very concise and sticks to introducing ideas that will be covered in the article. It doesn’t go into much detail on them and appears to cover an appropriate amount of information.

Content Guiding questions: Is the content added relevant to the topic?

       Yes, most of the content added is directly related to the topic and either depicts chronological events that occurred or different entities' reactions to them.

Is the content added up-to-date?

       There’s no reason to suspect that the article content is out of date.

Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

       It’s difficult to tell whether content is missing, but there isn’t any content that doesn’t belong.

Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

       The article mainly focuses on this potential IP address hack and the responses and opinions of various organizations and people. It is not clear whether these are historically underrepresented populations, but cyber security could be considered an undercovered topic.

Tone and Balance Guiding questions: Is the content added neutral?

       The majority of the content appears to be neutral, although the end of the final paragraph contains words such as should. Based on the phrasing, readers might be confused if this is the opinion of some person the article wants to quote or the article itself. Perhaps making it more clear who is saying and believes these statements would support the neutrality of this article.

Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?

       Various opinions are presented in the article, but the article gives fairly equal coverage to them all so it doesn’t come off as biased towards any one position.

Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?

       It does not appear so. Multiple viewpoints are presented in the article and there’s nothing that would indicate the viewpoints are presented in a disproportionate way. There are more viewpoints given that support the idea that the network anomaly came from China’s Great Wall of Fire, but there appears to be more people who believe this. This being said, both viewpoints are covered in some depth.

Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? With the exception of some unclear language in the final paragraph, the content doesn’t attempt to persuade the reader in any particular direction. Multiple viewpoints are covered and the rationale for each viewpoint is explained. Organization Guiding questions: Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?

       There are multiple sections of the article that are difficult to understand because of significant amounts of technical language and some phrases that aren’t clear. Sections that are unclear will be put in bold with a suggestion of how to improve it directly after.

Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?

       There are some words that I don’t recognize that could be spelling errors. They might also be technical jargon, but I will flag them.

Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

       The second and third paragraphs could potentially be combined into one since they both deal with the chronological order of the events that occurred. Additionally, the fourth paragraph seems to have similar information to the third paragraph as it relates to what happened to different domains. The other paragraphs seem to be divided into their respective sections. One way to make this more concrete might be to add section names.

Overall impressions Guiding questions: What are the strengths of the content added?

       The article has some areas that follow very logical and encyclopedic ways of presenting information that either appear in chronological order or are separated into their relative topic sections. The overall presentation of the article is very concise and sticks to the main points of the topics without unnecessary fluff or unrelated topics.

How can the content added be improved?

       Further organization in ways that make it more clear what is being communicated. This might include headings or some shuffling of the paragraphs. There seems to be some fragmented sentences or words that make that specific part of the article difficult to understand. Some long sentences could be split into multiple sentences for simplicity.

What's the most important thing the author could do to improve the article?

       Fix some of the unclear sentences and phrases.

Did you notice anything about the article you reviewed that could be applicable to your own article? Let them know!

       Yeah, I should probably try to establish a more direct and to the point way of writing that this article has.

Looking at the lead by itself, do I feel satisfied that I know the importance of the topic?

        Yes.

Does the article draw conclusions or try to convince the reader to accept one particular point of view?

       The article displays other people's conclusions about the subject, but doesn’t try to convince the reader.

Do you think you could guess the perspective of the author by reading the article?

       No, I could not.

Does the article make claims on behalf of unnamed groups or people? For example, "some people say..."

       In the final paragraph it is a little unclear who's saying what, but none of the groups are unnamed.

GoatCheesePizza (talk) 02:23, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Week 8 Peer Edit

Overall, the article maintains an encyclopedic format with facts being presented in a neutral way. People's opinions are quoted, but it is clear that this is an opinion of someone directly involved in the content of the article. The only phrase that could be interpreted as having some opinion in it is the phrase "was changed for no reason." This isn't super clearly an opinion, however, so it could be left. Where the article could benefit from is some reworking of sentences. The meaning beginning of the second paragraph isn't understood and appears to be more headings than a sentence. Throughout the article there are some sentences that have improper grammar or capitalizations where they shouldn't be. Correcting these will make the article much easier to understand. Additionally, dividing the content up into different headings could organize it better. This would also lead to better reader comprehension. These are the main things that could be fixed to make it better. GoatCheesePizza (talk) 06:34, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Draft Feedback: Internet anomalies in mainland China in 2014

Hello, overall your translation draft for Internet anomalies in mainland China in 2014 is easy to understand. It looks good! I have some suggestions below.

Title

• I realize that this is the translation from the Chinese Wikipedia article title, but I wonder if there is a better way to summarize the article. For instance, you use "2014 China Network Anomaly" in the lead, which (to me) sounds more straightforward.

Lead

• I noticed that the lead is listed under the Definition section. Since this is the lead, or summary intro, to the article, it does not need to be listed in a subsection, and it should be listed above the content menu. Removing the heading style will adjust that easily.
• The lead mentions "Great Wall of Fire Prevention", and I was wondering if this is the same thing as the "Great Firewall". If it is, then I would recommend switching to this term since it's more well known. If you change it, be sure to update it in other mentions throughout the article.

Process

• The last paragraph says "catch me if you can" twice. I think we can delete one of them in this article since we don't need to explain the phrase to the audience.

Notes and References

• I don't see the list of references with the translation, so make sure you add this in before uploading.

Final suggestions (for everyone):

• Make sure your article has the note about it being a translation from your language Wikipedia. Revisit the translation training modules to see how you can properly attribute authorship.
• Make sure that the article's in-line citations are properly formatted. Revisit the citations training modules.
• Before posting to the mainspace, do a final read through and check for typos, capitalization of proper nouns (ex. is your article about an app or law?), verb tense agreement, etc. The article does not need to be perfect--fellow Wikipedians will help edit--but it should be polished to the best of your ability.
• Consider adding wiki links
• Make sure that when you upload, the only thing in the draft is the article. Lab discussions should not appear in the mainspace.
• Upload when you are ready. The article does not need to be published in the very first week our lab starts uploading. If you still have questions or want more feedback, reach out to your buddy or me (no real names on Wikipedia, but since this may be the first time you see my Wikipedia username, I'm the senior coordinator for the project who is not your buddy haha).

-GlossomathisRabbit (talk) 08:37, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Draft Feedback: Hijacking of Baidu domain name in 2010

Hello, overall your translation draft for Hijacking of Baidu domain name in 2010 is clear and easy to understand. I have some suggestions below.

I think the formatting got lost when you pasted this in from the Google doc. Make sure to fix the formatting before uploading.

Title

• Similar to the previous draft, I think the "2010 Baidu domain name hijacking" is a more straightforward translation of the article title.

Process

• The section says "The site has been hacked by Iranian Cyber Army" twice. One of them can be taken out.
• There seems to be a link to an IP address in this section. I would recommend removing the link since we want to be intentional with the links, especially external links, used in the articles.

Notes and References

• I don't see the list of references with the translation, so make sure you add this in before uploading.

Final suggestions (for everyone):

• Make sure your article has the note about it being a translation from your language Wikipedia. Revisit the translation training modules to see how you can properly attribute authorship.
• Make sure that the article's in-line citations are properly formatted. Revisit the citations training modules.
• Before posting to the mainspace, do a final read through and check for typos, capitalization of proper nouns (ex. is your article about an app or law?), verb tense agreement, etc. The article does not need to be perfect--fellow Wikipedians will help edit--but it should be polished to the best of your ability.
• Consider adding wiki links
• Make sure that when you upload, the only thing in the draft is the article. Lab discussions should not appear in the mainspace.
• Upload when you are ready. The article does not need to be published in the very first week our lab starts uploading. If you still have questions or want more feedback, reach out to your buddy or me (no real names on Wikipedia, but since this may be the first time you see my Wikipedia username, I'm the senior coordinator for the project who is not your buddy haha).

-GlossomathisRabbit (talk) 08:46, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

2010 The Baidu Domain Name was hacked moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, 2010 The Baidu Domain Name was hacked, is not suitable as written to remain published. Please see WP:CITE and WP:CIT on how to format references, and what needs to be included in order for the reference to satisfy WP:VERIFY. It also needs the information to be footnoted, not just a list of refs at the end.(?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:32, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: 2010 Baidu domain name hijacking (May 12)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by AngusWOOF was:  The comment the reviewer left was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:2010 Baidu domain name hijacking and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:2010 Baidu domain name hijacking, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 15:30, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Pluto desdemona 134340! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 15:30, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Internet anomalies in mainland China in 2014

Hello, Pluto desdemona 134340. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Internet anomalies in mainland China in 2014, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 06:01, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Internet anomalies in mainland China in 2014

Hello, Pluto desdemona 134340. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Internet anomalies in mainland China in 2014".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:44, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:2010 Baidu domain name hijacking

Hello, Pluto desdemona 134340. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:2010 Baidu domain name hijacking, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 17:03, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:2010 Baidu domain name hijacking

Hello, Pluto desdemona 134340. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "2010 Baidu domain name hijacking".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:49, 12 November 2021 (UTC)