From My Desk To Yours – 27th Edition

By: Penny, EzineArticles Managing Editor

Were you recently on the receiving end of an email alerting you that one of your articles was placed in Problem Status for a lack of informative and original content?

This problem area has become one of the most common reasons for article rejection as we have expanded the types of situations when it’s appropriate.

In total, there are 5 different reasons why an article is placed in Problem Status for a “Lack of Original and Informative Content.” Any of these 5 reasons will trigger the email and the article will be on your account, waiting for changes and resubmission.

Top 5 Reasons For “Lack of Original and Informative Content” Email

Here are the top 5 reasons that an article will be rejected using the “Lack of Original and Informative Content” explanation:

1. The article has too many quoted sections.

Authors who write articles with a lot of quotes from outside sources are showing off the expertise of those other authors, not their own. Your readers want to hear more about the information that YOU have to offer them.

Our platform is the perfect place for you to share your unique content, not collect and present someone else’s, so any more than about 5 lines of quoted text is too much quoted material.

Remedy: Beef up your article to include more of your own unique content and less from others.

2. The article body is too short.

Sometimes, we see authors place the information that’s intended for the Resource Box at the bottom of the body and leave the actual Resource Box blank just to get over the minimum word count hump.

Those articles may make it through the initial computer-based verification process, but our human editors will catch the ones that slip through. Any content that is slightly promotional or quoted from another source is not counted in the total word count.

Remedy: Add more valuable content to your article, and place the author information in the Resource Box where it belongs.

3. The article doesn’t have content that’s unique.

The first time you share a valuable gem of information in an article, your stock as a credible author of 100% unique material goes up. If you take that same gem of information, reword it without adding anything new and submit the rehashed article, that second article isn’t unique. In fact, it even devalues the original high-quality article.

Rehashing old content and trying to fraudulently submit it as 100% original is a very bad idea.

Remedy: Instead, start “from scratch” with every new article. Find a new topic that’s related to your unique niche, then write an article on that topic and use the same links. You’ll increase your readership while feeding a similar audience with the information they need.

4. The article tells a story without expressing a point or moral to the story.

Journal entry-type writing can be very valuable and worthwhile to share in some cases. A story can provide a wonderful background for a point or philosophical statement.

In other cases, it can seem like endless rambling without a clear message.

Remedy: If you choose to submit a story, always ask yourself, “What is the moral or point of this story?” If none exists, you’ll either need to build a moral into it or scrap the idea altogether.

5. The article has content that doesn’t stand alone without the Resource Box link.

In this case, the article teases information, but all of the value is packed in a self-serving link at the end of the article. When there isn’t any real, substantial content for the reader to sink his or her teeth into in the article, that provides a very poor user experience.

The reader should be able to get everything that they expect out of the article. They shouldn’t have to jump from your article to your website to get the full picture of what you’re trying to say.

Remedy: All content should be robust and stand alone. Any links should be supplementary and not necessary to get your point across.

If, after checking for each of these problems, you are still left with questions about a specific article, feel free to contact our Member Support Team for further clarification.

In the coming weeks, new changes will be made to most sections of the Editorial Guidelines. We are adding far greater detail to this and other areas of the guidelines in the hopes of reducing any possible confusion for the reason an article is in Problem Status. We’ve taken our members pain points into consideration in this rework, and we expect that you will be pleased.

Feel free to leave a comment to share your thoughts or experiences with the “Lacks Original and Informative Content” Problem Status.


Kathy Hollar writes:


Thank you for this information. I must still ask if it is acceptable for anyone to purchase an article which is written exclusively for you (your website)?

I understood this is the reason I have a problem because one of the articles appears to be very similar to one already written and I have contacted Supra and they have corrected the problem. I deleted the article in question. Will I still have a problem if I use additional articles written exclusively for me?

Please advise.


Kathy Hollar

Comment provided May 4, 2011 at 11:27 AM



Do you trust your writer? If they wrote one bad article that appears to be a duplicate of others, chances are, the next one will be a duplicate as well.

Your credibility is what matters so do some additional research. Take 1-2 sentences from the article and do an advanced search online. If you find similarities, the content is not exclusive to you. I don’t know what service you are using but be careful not to purchase PLR article packs.

The only way to guarantee this never happens is to write your own content. To help me gain additional insight to your situation, why are you purchasing articles and not writing them yourself?


Nick Kellingley writes:

Hi Kathy,

Penny’s right in that if your provider is giving you duplicate content – even once is too much – you should buy from another source in future.

While I understand that EzineArticles prefer you to write your own material (and I do) it’s not always possible for everyone to write their own (or economic for that matter).

But a lot depends (as has been said before) as to what you pay for your articles as to whether they represent decent value or not – if you’re bargain shopping in the $5 an article range, stop and write your own anyway as that content is always low end.


Neil Ferree writes:

Excellent tips on how to “get it right” the 1st time. What would be REALLY helpful to see / read in an upcoming piece form your desk would be a similar hard hitting piece that would give me the ammo to educate and motivate my clients on the value they would get from becoming more active in authoring EzineArticles content in such a way as to propel them as SME in their niche markets.

Comment provided May 4, 2011 at 1:42 PM


Shane Nolan writes:

I have had issues with my articles before and sometimes fully understanding what the problem is can be difficult. The two minute tip series has helped a lot and my writing has improved due to these standards.
EzineArticles quality standards can be hugely frustrating at times, but in most cases when I review my problem article it is not good quality. These standards stop us from becoming LAZY writers and authors.Cheers

Comment provided May 4, 2011 at 3:16 PM



Or optimistically, “Better Writers.” :)


Noman writes:

I think this extra quality control is a good move, to educate and/or weed out lazy writers.

But in response to the Google panda update, does EzineArticles have any plans to delete any pre-existing, poor quality artcicles that wouldn’t stand up to the new editorial guidelines?

Comment provided May 4, 2011 at 5:51 PM



Quality standards rise everyday so we are continuously revisiting previously approved articles and making decisions. We are motivated to keep the best content live and remove the thin. Many members have done a great job in cleaning up their article portfolio and have asked good questions along the way.

We’ll continue to educate and absorb your feedback through every change.



A genuine writer who sincerely remain loyal to the article he is writing with a purpose in mind to communicate some useful information would never face above bottlenecks.

Comment provided May 4, 2011 at 7:01 PM



This is a great summary. I have been a professional writer all my life, but am new to Internet publishing and blogging. Your presentation confirms what I have learned so far.

Comment provided May 4, 2011 at 8:29 PM


Anne Laidlaw writes:

I don’t know if practice makes perfect but it sure makes better articles. The more you write the better your articles will become. For those just starting out it will become easier the more articles you complete. Write about a passion you have, at the least do research on the topic.

Comment provided May 4, 2011 at 11:45 PM


Upendra writes:

More Wishes for Bright Articles from team writers!!! Longlive!!!

Comment provided May 5, 2011 at 1:07 AM


William Post writes:

I have gotten into the habit of really taking my time and re-reading my articles before I submit to EzineArticles. This worked well so far.

Comment provided May 5, 2011 at 6:34 AM


Ryan writes:

Hello Penny,

I submitted three articles now and all have been rejected. I have been ripped off a couple of times by these marketing gurus that sell you articles( for $$$$$) and tell you to post them here for link. Quickly you shut those articles down. I believe my writing skills are valuable enough to be posted at EzineArticles. I wrote an article based on an interesting story I read in a magazine. When I searched it many post same article and take credit for it wrongfully. I wrote the article in my own words with my outlook on the issue. I don’t understand why I keep getting rejected it almost seems because I did not know about the dishonest people profiting on these articles existed. So I want to make sure I haven’t been “black-listed” on the articles that I write. Please let me know if there is anything I can do to help my-self. Thank-You for your time.

Comment provided May 5, 2011 at 7:36 AM



I was not able to locate your account with your name or email address. Have you contacted our Member Support team? If you haven’t yet, please do so and I’ll look for it. Unless you want to post the author name associated with the account via this thread.


Ryan Mullen writes:

Hi Penny ‘

Thank-you for getting back to me quickly. I think when i first started my email was if that helps. My last article was the healthy breakfasts. Who wouldn’t love a recipe to a healthy breakfast. I hope this helps I don’t want to play back&forth and accomplish nothing. I would take your class but i have signed up for Aaron Walls SEO Book and having problems with the 4th day no reply.As soon as i free up some money will my articles get published with their training,

Thank you,
\ Ryan Mullen

Comment provided May 5, 2011 at 10:11 PM


Jim T writes:

This “Lack of Original and Informative Content” is a very good article because it actually explains why the article has been bought into question.
Would it not be possible to put a link on to rejected articles so that the author could read a complete version of the reason, instead of just a very confusing one liner?, regards Jim T.

Comment provided May 6, 2011 at 10:08 AM



Our new editorial guidelines will be this clear. They’ll be live soon. :)



Your article on problems with submitted articles was well received by me. I have had submitted articles that were submitted and published immediately and also those stubborn problem articles. I’ve always submitted unique content that comes from my education, experience and practice.

What confuses me is that I have noted “diamond authors” on your home page that have written articles that rehash the same ideas. What’s the point? I quickly got out of their article. But why are they on the EzineArticles homepage when they clearly are writing short, rehashed articles?

Thank you.

Comment provided May 8, 2011 at 9:06 AM


Jim writes:

This comment; “Lack of Original and Informative Content” Is typical of the sort of responses that we sometimes recieve from EzineArticles. No problem there. However in this particular instance you go a lot further and actually explain the reason why, which is great, is there anywhere where we can download a list of these one line rejejections with the reasons attached as in your article?
regards jim T.

Comment provided May 8, 2011 at 10:59 AM



I responded above. We are at the end stages of the re-write of our Editorial Guidelines. They’ll be live soon and will provide details like this post for easy understanding.


Geoff writes:

It’s good to know I’m not the only one who has fallen foul of some of the rules on occasions. It’s useful to have the remedy explained to us, as in the first post, many thanks.

Comment provided May 10, 2011 at 5:55 AM


Alrick writes:

Thanks for sharing your do follow blogs. This is a good news for all those people who are actually looking for do follow blogs and sites because it is really hard to find one.

Comment provided May 17, 2011 at 10:40 AM


Frank writes:

Wow! Briliant Idea.
Many THINK they understand social media, but in fact they DON’T…
These nuggets of knowledge is very useful. I want to share also some Tips.

Comment provided May 26, 2011 at 10:45 AM



I am impress with the rejection policy, it made me realized that there are humans that also vet articles and that articles cannot just be duplicated by others. This makes the articles on this website unique as they recommend that the author of an article you like be quoted as the rightful owner of such article in your own article if ever you wish to use some of the article information.


Comment provided May 13, 2012 at 12:22 AM


RSS feed for comments on this post.

Leave a comment

Please read our comment policy before commenting.