Rejection is usually a sourcing verdict
Reviewers decline drafts for a short list of reasons, and the top one dwarfs the rest: the sources do not show notability. Everything else — tone, formatting, structure — can be fixed by editing. Missing independent coverage cannot.
The common reasons
1. Not enough independent, reliable, substantial sources. The draft cites press releases, the subject’s website, interviews or sponsored features. The reviewer sees no evidence that anyone independent has written about the subject in depth.
2. Promotional tone. “Leading”, “renowned”, “innovative”, “trusted by” — marketing language signals a conflict of interest and is declined even when sources exist.
3. Undisclosed conflict of interest or paid editing. Accounts that edit only one subject, or that were paid without disclosure, are blocked. The article often goes with them.
4. Copyright. Text copied from the subject’s website or a brochure is removed on sight.
5. Recreation of deleted material. Reposting an article that was deleted, without new sourcing, triggers speedy deletion and makes the subject harder to publish later.
What actually fixes it
- For sourcing failures: earn new independent coverage, then reassess. Rewriting does not help.
- For tone: strip every evaluative word and let the sources speak.
- For conflict of interest: disclose properly and work through the review process.
- For deletion history: understand the deletion discussion before doing anything.
Before you resubmit
Have the decline reasons and the draft history read by someone who understands them. Our rejected draft assessment tells you whether resubmission is viable, and what it would take.