How do I put up a strong arguement for an Appeal?


I need some advice. I want to file for an appeal.
Sadly, I don’t normally have much hope in appeals, but I feel I may be close as just one criteria wasn’t awarded and for one reason.

I Submitted my application and was awarded the two OCs but I wasn’t awarded the MC.

Recommendation Letters:
Lead Engineer at company 1
CEO of company 2
A Developer community leader and Founder of a company
(All of these people have a good public profile)

Pieces of Evidence for MC
1 Payslip for company_3
2. Contibution to company_1: Evidence explaining the magnitude of the project - Lines of code, commit history for key features, emails of tasks assignment, screenshot, articles showing the projects/features use in market, metrics and highlights of these features in media.
3. Contibution to company_2: A product led fintech - Evidence explaining contributions to key features in the project - Lines of code, commit history, clearly showing my contribution to key features. Articles showing review of the feature on a top trading website, A column on reddit where users were discussing the feature.
4. Contribution to company_3: Evidence explaining contributions to key features in the project - Lines of code, tasks assignment, clearly showing my contribution to key features, Internal team shout outs (not just me but the entire team was tagged), Articles about the feature in the market, company metrics

Point to note also, I had used a newspaper interview I from 2yrs ago as OC, but reviewers also acknowledged it as MC and were okay with it.

I made sure all the references highlighted my contributions to these projects and stated that I showed leadership.

To meet Mandatory Criteria (MC), the candidate must show they have been recognised as having the
potential to be a leading talent in the digital technology sector in the last five years. Typically, EP
awardees evidence more vital leadership through a mixture of exceptional references from a more
comprehensive network of established technology industry leaders that detail how, what, and why the
candidate is a leader in their field; a more comprehensive array of significant media recognition;
examples of high-profile speaking engagements or editorial engagements where the candidate is
featured as a keynote or their unique knowledge be the primary subject of each article; exceptionally
high compensation concerning their peer group and employer’s country; and other forms of
recognisable contributions that are celebrated in their own right of which the candidate is a validated
author to prove recognition from a national or international level. Whilst in the evidence the candidate
has named Criteria 1, he proves his contribution as Technical Support Engineer at company_1 as well as evidence titled Criteria 4 that demonstrates his contribution at company_2 as a Software Engineer and Evidence two that shows the candidate’s contribution as Software Engineer at company_3, there is no industry recognition to this work/proof that he has been recognised as having the potential to be a leading talent. The articles the candidate has included in these examples refer to the project rather than the candidate- and this criterion is about how the candidate can demonstrate the industry has personally recognised them as having the potential to be a leading talent. Whilst his Salary proves employment (Criteria 3), and even though there is 1 article presented in the guardian, this alone isn’t sufficient evidence to prove that they have been recognised as having the potential to be a leading talent in the digital technology sector at the standard expected for EP. We cannot award MC

I sort of used their examples as a guide to arrange my evidences

I’m thinking of arguing based on this: It is stated clearly as evidenced by recommendation letter or news clippings or lines of code.
My reference letters were well written and clearly corroborates these documents and my contribution, There were clear lines of code, commit history, and other indicators to show I worked deeply on these features. The news clippings I included were about the project in general and proof of how successful these projects and features are in the market. The articles can’t single me out because most companies with a team structure won’t single out a staff and make news about the person.
Does it make sense to argue that visible success in market + well written recommendation letters from a Industry experts should be considered as industry recognition?

Please how best can I put my strongest foot forward :pray:

@Francisca_Chiedu @Gbemiga_Adelola @igortsk @ask4jubad @alexnk @Afolabi @mojisolao @tundeph @ask4jubad @aqueue @oluwabig

The mandatory criteria is the most important to prove, and demonstrates whether you should be endorsed an EP or ET. I think you should have had some documents in your OC moved to MC as also pointed out by the assessors with respect to the newspaper interview.

It is honestly going to be a hard call to make given you cannot add new evidences or re-order your references at this point. If there are articles or information in your recommendation letter that were missed, and that pointed to your work, recognition and significant contributions, you may want to highlight in your appeal (there’s no harm in trying).

On your statement that articles can’t single you out, that is exactly what TN wants. You as a singled out exceptionally talented person in the pool of other several co-workers and talents in your field. Don’t forget that while other visas tie you to a thing, or organization, the GTV is on your merit, so you’ve got to prove that!

Give your appeal a shot, and I wish you the best.