User talk:2603:7000:2143:8500:F992:48F2:6C05:2099

Your submission at Articles for creation: Stephen Kovacs has been accepted

Stephen Kovacs, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 21% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You may wish to consider registering an account so you can create articles yourself.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

S0091 (talk) 00:56, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

• S0091 - you are amazing. I was preparing myself for hours, days, weeks of frustration as I waited .. despite this being important news of the moment. Thanks! 2603:7000:2143:8500:F992:48F2:6C05:2099 (talk) 01:05, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

  It is clear you are not new to Wikipedia or if you just happen to be, the "amazing" is back atcha. It is an well written, neutral article especially given the subject with all the bells and whistles of a Wikipedia article. S0091 (talk) 01:09, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

  Thanks. It took forever to write it! But I thought it was worth the effort. Appreciate it. 2603:7000:2143:8500:F992:48F2:6C05:2099 (talk) 01:11, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

  My hope is that some of the parents of kids he coached over the last decade now see this, are apprised of what may have happened, talk to their kids, and get them support if appropriate. Without sunshine on this .... a child or two might suffer in silence. (If there are indeed such children, of course). 2603:7000:2143:8500:F992:48F2:6C05:2099 (talk) 01:14, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

  Oh and my part of it is I just happen to be lazily watching the new page feed and most of what I see is...well...not great. Yours was an eye-opener. Thanks for pulling it together and submitting it. In hindsight, the artilce should have already existed. S0091 (talk) 01:16, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

  Thanks again. Very kind. My computer changes my ip address regularly (not my call), but perhaps (hopefully) out paths will cross again. Thanks. 2603:7000:2143:8500:F992:48F2:6C05:2099 (talk) 01:17, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

  It is the great shift our society that these awful, awful crimes are now coming out in the open and the victims of those crimes are making that happen and we as a society are largely doing our best to not make it be shameful. It's been a long time coming for that and granted that is not how it is across our globe but the momentum is there, finally. Anyway, that's my diatribe for the day. Again, great work! S0091 (talk) 01:20, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

• Agreed. But this SafeSport .. it's still struggling to be competent. The fellow self-reported. And it still took SafeSport 1-2 months to suspend him temporarily. That's shocking. Then again, they still have him listed as temporarily suspended, and under investigation. So maybe they just have an embedded month-or-two time delay. My diatribe. 2603:7000:2143:8500:F992:48F2:6C05:2099 (talk) 01:24, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Just noted the see also removal. I had thought the see also articles were appropriate, per wp:see also. Specifically, to quote from it: "The links in the "See also" section should be relevant, should reflect the links that would be present in a comprehensive article on the topic, and should be limited to a reasonable number. One purpose of "See also" links is to enable readers to explore tangentially related topics; however, articles linked should be related to the topic of the article.... Editors should provide a brief annotation when a link's relevance is not immediately apparent...). So, the two are both cases of people accused of sexual abuse of young women. In the case of Nasser, also of young women in an Olympic sport - exactly where there is a problem that SafeSport was created to address. And in the case of Epstein, the person imprisoned in American for alleged sexual abuse of young women dies suddenly .. not a usual even at all. Both those cases come to mind if one thinks about this case, imho, and therefore meet the "tangentially related topics" guideline. Your thoughts? 2603:7000:2143:8500:F992:48F2:6C05:2099 (talk) 01:40, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

---