Page 1 of 1

Should I submit more articles after rejection?

Posted: Wed Aug 03, 2011 1:43 am
by sonsofloki
I'm very new to CC. I submitted two articles earlier this week and had them rejected for non-original content - fair enough, I used to have them on my blog and though I'd unpublished them there, maybe they were still showing up in Google or maybe I'd published them somewhere else and forgotten they were there.

Now I have a third article awaiting review. I want to add more articles, but I'm worried that if they get rejected for any reason (they are totally original this time :D) I run the risk of having my account suspended. Should I add more articles now, or wait for my current article to be reviewed? Thank you!

Re: Should I submit more articles after rejection?

Posted: Wed Aug 03, 2011 1:35 pm
by EricTroy
Hi, I am new here as well but I would definitely wait on submitting more until you get the present one through. You are bound to have misplaced a comma or too. I've never known a writer who doesn't and you have once chance left to get it right before your three strikes. However, I am sure that if you contacted support and explained to them about your mistake they would not be completely rigid (of course I do not know). I know this may sound weird to others who don't have websites, etc. but I believe you when you say you may have published them elsewhere and forgotten! I've got so many article floating around here and there that I cannot always remember where they are. I'd definitely say to always write fresh content for here. Even if you removed them from your website a while ago, technically they are still previously published. Good luck!

Re: Should I submit more articles after rejection?

Posted: Sun Aug 07, 2011 11:14 am
by JoyRCalderwood
You can submit those type for usage license only.

Re: Should I submit more articles after rejection?

Posted: Mon Aug 08, 2011 8:18 am
by jak
But they will only be accepted for usage if it is obvious that they are your own work, ie the byline or name of your blog is the same as you are using here.