Vse o stroyke: what it is and whether USCIS counts it (O-1 / EB-1A)
Все о стройке
Key answer
About the outlet
- Site
- xn--b1agapfwapgcl.xn--p1ai
- Type
- Russian-language outlet
- Category
- Construction and real estate
- Reach
- 200K/mo · #143 of 256 in our base
- In its category
- 1 of 4 by reach
Its reach is around or below the median of our base (310K/mo). Industry level: Support with specialization in a specific field, a professional audience, expert materials, participation by expert authors, and citations within the industry.
From the outlet's site and the media register
What the outlet's site xn--b1agapfwapgcl.xn--p1ai states and what the registers show. Paraphrased, checked Oct 2, 2026.
- Publisher
- The founder of the online outlet "Vsyo o stroyke" is a sole proprietor (per the site footer); the footer gives the years 2018-2026.
- Media registration
- The site states registration of 13.03.2023, El No. FS77-84949; the Roskomnadzor register lists "Vsyo o stroyke", status "active".
- Audience
- The media kit names developers' staff, government officials, building-material makers and property buyers as the target audience; it reports 10,518 subscribers for its MAX channel.
- Editorial team
- According to the contacts page, the same person is the portal director and editor-in-chief; the site runs developer rankings and asks to write to the newsroom about how they are compiled.
- Advertising and sponsored content
- Media kit: placing an informational/editorial/author article costs 110,000 roubles, an advertising article 40,000 roubles, a banner from 25,000 roubles a month, a post in its Telegram channel 180,000 roubles.
- The site calls itself an independent platform for development in Russia and the CIS.
Source: the outlet's site xn--b1agapfwapgcl.xn--p1ai (pages /kontakty, /mediakit); the Roskomnadzor media register, checked Oct 2, 2026. The terms may change; the version on the site applies.
What officers look at. 8 CFR 204.5(h)(3)(iii) refers to published material about the applicant in professional or major trade publications or other major media, relating to the applicant's work in the field, including the title, date and author of the material. Officers therefore look at whether the material is about the applicant, who publishes the outlet and how large its audience or circulation is, and whether the piece is advertising or a paid placement.
What we could not find
- We found no Wikipedia article about the outlet, so the page carries no independent encyclopaedic description.
- This outlet did not come up in the public community chats.
These are the limits of our data, not an assessment of the outlet: a missing record counts neither for nor against a publication. A USCIS officer decides each case.
Not yet flagged as a major outlet
Based on our database of 287 outlets. This is a reference assessment, not a USCIS decision.
For the publications criterion, what matters is not only the outlet's "size" but that the material is about you and your work, appears in an independent source with real reach, and names the outlet, date and author. More in the criteria overview.
What makes an outlet «major» for USCIS
Publications that are primarily online are acceptable as major media when they have significant national readership and demonstrate editorial control (not user-generated content or a web portal).
Significant national audience / readership
Circulation, monthly unique visitors, audited reach - with the measurement source named (Comscore, Similarweb, AAM/ABC, TNS).
Intended for a professional or national audience (distribution)
Who it reaches and how it is distributed nationally - print + digital, peer set, professional readership.
Editorial control - not user-generated content or a web portal
Named editorial staff, journalism awards, fact-checking ratings - proof a newsroom controls the content.
Signs of an editorial outlet
- Has a registered editorial office and public contact information
- Regularly publishes news and original materials
- Editorial policy, correction rules, and disclaimers are listed
- Has a staff of writers, editors, and fact-checking
- Materials have categories, dates, bylines, and sources
- The site has a stable audience and a professional structure
Signs of a platform, not media
- This is a personal blog or channel without an editorial office
- Publications are irregular and have no bylines
- No transparent contact information or owner details
- The main content is reposts, rumors, or opinions
- No standards for fact-checking or correcting errors
- The audience is small or the platform looks amateur
8 CFR 204.5(h)(3)(iii) · USCIS Policy Manual, Vol. 6, Pt. F, Ch. 2 · Roskomnadzor media registry
Similar outlets (Construction and real estate)
Why this criterion gets refused
The grounds officers actually rely on when they refuse this criterion, and how often it survives.
Among petitions that drew an RFE, NOID or denial and claimed this criterion, the officer accepted it in 24% of cases (47 of 200).
This is not an approval rate. The sample is petitions that were challenged, so it says how often a claimed criterion survived scrutiny - nothing about how often EB-1A petitions succeed overall.
Based on: 253 coded USCIS I-140 notices (RFE, NOID, denial) · updated Sep 6, 2026 · RFE by criterion
The outlet is not accepted as a professional, trade or major publication. Traffic figures do not help: the officer looks at the outlet’s editorial standing, not visitor counts.
The platform accepts user-generated and marketing content. Where anyone can post, the officer has no assurance of editorial selection or independence.
Grounds observed across 150 real USCIS notices, summarized in our own words - not quotations from any individual case.
Documents and templates from the library
PR-CY traffic snapshot for news site, Nov 2023Example petition2 pages anonymized access on request
O-1 exhibit sample for a media articleTemplate22 pages anonymized access on request
BCS Fellowship interview prep guide, Apr 2026Guide7 pages anonymized access on request
Approved EB-1 evidence set for real estate developmentGuide1 page anonymized access on request
From community practice
Support letters are stronger when written by independent experts familiar with your work who cite concrete results rather than general praise.
Field chats advise gathering evidence for a specific criterion from the start, rather than bolting it onto the petition at the last moment.
Regional or niche outlets can also help if they have independent editorial control and measurable reach in your field - not only global brands.
Distilled from public community chats - observations, not legal advice.
From community discussions
«A product that went global with 6 million in revenue is not an achievement for the criterion and not a contribution to the industry. It's hard to accept, but that's how it is. A contribution to the industry is showing with independent sources (tons of media, a professional award for this contribution) that your product specifically changed the industry.»
community member · from public community chats
«At a minimum, you can attach your forum participant certificate - usually it's a photo, last name and organization. If there's video content of your talk - that can also be used. Plus attach a link to federal media where the forum's results were covered, as well as materials on participation in the working group. Separately you can attach information about how forum participants are selected (there are probably some selection criteria at the professional level).»
Olga · from public community chats
«Of everything you've said, the key thing is the invitation from the Ministry of Industry and Trade (i.e. the letter). Expertise will already be built on this (clippings from media about the significance of the congress being held). It's advisable to dig up information on how you performed - were a speaker, possibly an interview with you or an article about how Epic Speaker Vasya Pupkin gave a super successful talk and brought the house down with applause.»
community member · from public community chats
Personal opinions of community members from public discussions, not legal advice.
Reference information, not legal advice and not a USCIS decision. Weigh the outlet's independence, reach and reputation, and whether the publication is actually about you.