Digital Marketing Write for Us Guide — Submission Rules

digital marketing write for us submissions succeed when you follow the site’s exact rules, not when you send the longest draft or the flashiest pitch. This guide gives you the submission requirements overview, a writer-focused guest post checklist, and the technical details you need to submit correctly the first time. Rules last updated 2026-05-23; policies may change.

If you are looking at a digital marketing write for us page, treat this article as the submission playbook, not the pitching playbook. For a complete outreach strategy that pairs with these submission rules, see our Guest Posting Outreach Guide. If you are still deciding whether the tactic is worth the effort, review Do guest posts still work in 2026?.

Quick summary — what this page covers and who should use it

This page explains exactly what we require when you submit a guest post: who can submit, what topics we accept, how we check originality, how to format headings and links, what images and files to include, and how disclosures work for paid placements. It is built for writers, agencies, brand teams, and editors who need a submission requirements overview before sending a draft.

Use this guide if you want to submit a digital marketing write for us guest post, a marketing write for us article, or any other contributor piece that must pass editorial review on the first try. Think of it as a pre-flight guest post checklist. If your draft already exists, the checklist helps you spot the fixes that prevent delays.

Use it before submission: confirm topic fit, link policy, images, and author bio.
Use it during QA: verify originality, citations, formatting, and disclosure language.
Use it after rejection: identify the exact issue and resubmit cleanly.

For placement planning, pair these rules with our guest post placement strategy and guest posting outreach guide so your topic, format, and target page all match the same editorial standard.

Eligibility & topic fit — who can submit and acceptable topics

We review every submission for niche fit and topical relevance. “Editorial discretion” means we can decline a piece even if it is technically well written when the angle is too broad, promotional, repetitive, or outside our audience. For topic selection, align your draft with practical digital marketing value, not brand promotion.

Eligible authors and organizations

We accept submissions from:

Independent writers with demonstrable subject knowledge
Agency teams submitting on behalf of clients
In-house marketers, founders, and product specialists
Subject-matter experts with original data, case studies, or process experience
Organizations that can provide transparent author details and disclosure information

We may request a company name, role, website, and a short editorial history if the content involves regulated, financial, or technical claims. For agencies, the byline must clearly identify the actual writer or approved spokesperson.

Topics we accept and topics we reject (explicit list)

If you are choosing a topic for submission, review the guest post niches that pay to pick high-value angles.

We accept:

Practical digital marketing processes, frameworks, and checklists
SEO, content marketing, email, analytics, CRO, and paid media tactics
Case studies with clear methods and outcomes
Tool comparisons when based on first-hand use
Workflow improvements, templates, and troubleshooting guides
Original research, surveys, or benchmarks with sources

We reject:

Generic “10 tips” content with no original insight
Purely promotional brand pages or product dumps
Topics outside marketing, advertising, or adjacent growth functions
Thin AI-spun drafts with no fact-checking or author perspective
Adult, gambling, illegal, deceptive, or hate-related topics
Content that repeats the same angle already covered on our site

For niche planning and monetization context, see guest posting company guide if you are submitting at scale, and use our editorial standards to keep the angle specific enough to earn approval.

Content quality, originality & fact-checking

Our originality standard is simple: zero tolerance for plagiarism, copied structure, or lightly rewritten source material. We check submissions for uniqueness, source quality, and attribution quality. According to Copyscape, plagiarism detection helps identify matching text across the web; we use a similar review mindset even when a draft “looks original” at first glance. For team workflows, you may also use Turnitin or another equivalent checker before sending files.

We reserve the right to reject posts that contain duplicated passages, unattributed quotes, recycled intros, or claims that cannot be traced to a primary source. The goal is not only to avoid plagiarism, but to protect topical authority: original content earns trust because it adds something a reader cannot get from a generic web search result.

Originality standards and plagiarism checks

Run a plagiarism check before submission. Use Copyscape, Turnitin, or a comparable tool to scan the final draft, not an early outline.
Review near matches manually. Tools can flag common phrases, product names, and citation lines; confirm whether the match is acceptable or needs rewriting.
Remove duplicated structure. Even if wording is changed, copying someone else’s sequence of subheads and examples can still feel derivative.
Document your sources. Save URLs, article titles, author names, publication dates, and retrieval dates in one source list.
Submit only the final version. If you revise after the check, rerun it on the new version.

Stat block: plagiarism tolerance

Allowed: direct quotes with quotation marks and attribution
Allowed: standard industry terminology and common phrases
Allowed: properly cited definitions and stats
Not allowed: uncited copied sentences, paragraphs, or borrowed examples
Not allowed: spun text that preserves the original meaning and structure too closely

Citation expectations and acceptable sources

We expect citations when you use statistics, research findings, legal or regulatory statements, product limitations, or technical claims. Use primary sources first: official documentation, original studies, vendor docs, government pages, and the author’s own published data. Secondary sources are acceptable only when they clearly attribute the original source.

For style consistency, write citations in a simple inline format such as “According to a 2025 industry report by [source], …” or link the source in the sentence itself. If your piece includes a dense factual section, footnotes or endnotes are acceptable as long as each claim is traceable. If you need style guidance, AP Style conventions remain the default reference for clean attribution and editorial clarity; compare your formatting against the AP Stylebook when you are unsure.

According to Ahrefs, link and anchor text patterns can influence how search engines interpret relevance. That is why we ask for high-quality sources and clean citations: strong evidence supports topical authority and reduces revision cycles. If you want a quick quality pass before sending, review our quality checks before publishing.

Mini workflow for fact-checking:

Highlight every number, quote, and claim in your draft.
Verify the claim against a primary source.
Add the source URL, title, and publication date to your sources list.
Confirm that the claim still holds in 2026, not only in an older article.
Replace vague “studies show” phrasing with exact attribution.

Screenshot concept: capture your plagiarism checker results next to your CMS draft so editors can see that the final version passed originality review. Include a second screenshot showing the CMS alt-text field filled in for one image; this helps demonstrate the review standard you followed.

This section often decides acceptance. If your source quality is weak, the rest of the draft rarely matters. Next, the formatting rules show how to present the same information in a way the editor can publish without cleanup.

Formatting & technical specifications

Format is not cosmetic. Clean structure improves readability, scanning, and editorial speed. We expect consistent H2/H3 usage, moderate paragraph length, and obvious hierarchy so an editor can see the article’s logic in minutes. Think of the structure like a file system: if the folders are tidy, the content is easier to review and easier to publish.

Word count, headings, subheads and paragraph length

Word count policy: target 1,200–2,500 words unless the submission form specifies a different range. Shorter drafts may be accepted if they answer a focused question with authority.
Headings: use one H2 per major section and H3 only when you need a nested explanation. Do not stack multiple H2s without supporting paragraphs.
Paragraph length: keep most paragraphs to 2–5 sentences. Break long blocks into readable chunks.
Sentence length: mix short and medium sentences. Avoid dense chains of clauses that slow comprehension.
Readability: use plain-language explanations first, then technical detail.

When in doubt, build your structure around reader tasks. If a section explains a process, use step-by-step formatting. If it compares options, use a table. If it defines a concept, use a short paragraph followed by an example.

HTML example:

<h2>Content quality, originality & fact-checking</h2>
<h3>Citation expectations and acceptable sources</h3>

Markdown example:

## Content quality, originality & fact-checking
### Citation expectations and acceptable sources

Lists, callouts, blockquotes, code blocks, and tables

Lists: use bulleted lists for options, rules, and checklists; use numbered lists for sequential instructions.
Callouts: use bold labels like “Required,” “Optional,” and “Do not” rather than decorative styling that could break in the CMS.
Blockquotes: use only for quoted material or highlighted editor notes.
Code blocks: include code snippets when showing HTML, Markdown, schema, or link formatting.
Tables: use tables for comparisons such as in-body links vs author-bio links or free vs paid placements.

Example code block for a link:

<a href="/guest-post-outreach/seo-guest-post-guide/" title="SEO Guest Post Guide for Effective Backlink Submissions">SEO guest post guide</a>

Example HTML list:

<ul><li>Fact-check all claims</li><li>Add image credits</li><li>Confirm link attributes</li></ul>

Example table pattern:

<table><thead>...</thead><tbody>...</tbody></table>

Required metadata: title tag suggestion, meta description, suggested slug

Title tag length: keep the SEO title around 50–60 characters when possible so it does not truncate excessively in search results.
Meta description: write 140–155 characters with the primary keyword, value proposition, and a subtle CTA.
Suggested slug: use a short, descriptive slug with no filler words. Example: /guest-post-outreach/write-for-us-submission-requirements-guide/
Consistency: title, slug, and H2s should all signal the same topic and search intent.
No keyword stuffing: use the exact phrase naturally, not repeatedly in every field.

According to a recent SEO testing perspective from Moz, clarity and alignment between title, intent, and on-page structure help users and search engines understand relevance faster. That is why our formatting rules are strict: they reduce ambiguity before review even begins.

Before moving on, make sure your draft already looks publishable in plain text. The next section explains how images and embedded media must be prepared so they do not slow down production.

Images, multimedia & attribution rules

Images should support the article, not decorate it. We accept original screenshots, branded diagrams, process visuals, and relevant editorial images when they are licensed correctly. If you use a stock image, you must provide the license source. If you use a screenshot, you must ensure the source data is visible and the image is readable at mobile sizes.

Image types, sizes, file formats and alt text requirements

Asset type	Recommended format	Minimum size	Notes
Hero image	JPG or PNG	1200 × 630 px	Use for featured image and social preview
In-article screenshot	PNG	1200 px wide	Keep text large enough for mobile viewing
Diagram or chart	PNG or SVG	Readable at 800 px wide	Label axes and sources clearly
Thumbnail	JPG or PNG	400 × 400 px minimum	Use a simplified crop for listing pages

Alt text is required for every non-decorative image. Describe what the image shows and why it matters, not the phrase “image of.” For example, write “Copyscape plagiarism report showing 0% exact matches for the final draft” instead of a vague caption.

Screenshot concept: include one CMS screenshot showing the image upload panel with alt text filled in, and one screenshot of a draft article with a caption field populated. These two images help editors verify that your workflow matches the submission requirement.

Video embeds and transcript requirements

Video embeds are optional unless the submission form asks for them. If you include an embed, make sure the video directly supports the article and does not interrupt the reading flow. Provide a transcript or a concise summary beneath the embed when the video contains essential instructions or verbal-only steps.

One example attribution line: “Screenshot by [Author Name], source: [Company Name], used with permission.”

For licensing clarity, include image attribution in the file notes and in the draft body if the image is not self-created. If you quote or adapt a visual from a source, cite the original page and confirm reuse rights before submission. That keeps your content aligned with publication standards and reduces last-minute asset requests.

With media cleared, the next gate is links. This is where many submissions fail, so the linking rules below are intentionally specific.

Linking & SEO policies

Linking affects both editorial quality and SEO outcomes. A balanced link profile can support topical authority, but too many commercial links can make the piece feel promotional. We evaluate link placement, anchor text policy, and link attributes together. According to Google Search Central, links that are paid, sponsored, or otherwise compensated should use appropriate disclosure and rel attributes such as rel="sponsored". That guidance is the baseline for our policies.

Allowed link types (author bio vs in-body) and maximum links per post

We allow links in two places: the article body and the author bio. In-body links should support the reader with evidence, tools, or references. Author-bio links should identify the contributor and point to a relevant personal or company page. For most submissions, more than 2–4 external links in the body triggers review because it can look link-heavy or commercial.

According to Ahrefs, anchor patterns and link context matter for topical relevance and search interpretation. That is why we prefer fewer, better-placed links over a long list of unrelated citations. If your strategy relies on SEO-specific backlinks, review our SEO guest post guide before finalizing the draft.

Placement	Allowed?	Typical limit	Best use case
In-body links	Yes	2–4 external links	Primary sources, tools, documentation, or neutral references
Author bio link	Yes	1–2 links	Author site, company profile, or relevant profile page
Commercial product link	Limited	Case-by-case	Only when context is genuinely useful and disclosed

Anchor text rules and preferred attribution linking

Anchor text policy is simple: make it descriptive, relevant, and natural. Avoid exact-match keyword stuffing, repetitive branded anchors, and “click here” phrasing that tells the reader nothing. Preferred anchor text should describe the destination page or source, not just the SEO target keyword.

Good anchor text examples:

official documentation
industry benchmark report
Google Search Central guidance
editorial style guide
original study on CTR trends

Weak anchor text examples:

best digital marketing write for us
click here
cheap guest post backlinks
SEO SEO SEO

HTML example with exact link formatting:

<a href="/guest-post-outreach/guest-post-brief-template-for-writers/" title="Guest Post Brief Template for Writers">guest post brief template</a>

For editorial balance, place the most important source link in context where the claim appears, not in a random footer. If the reference is only there to attribute a chart or statistic, a citation link is usually enough. If the reference helps the reader take action, the link can appear in-body.

rel attributes and disclosure for sponsored links

Use rel="sponsored" for paid or compensated links, rel="nofollow" when a link should not pass editorial endorsement, and rel="ugc" when the link is user-generated in a comment-like or community context. These attributes help label the nature of the link for search systems and protect disclosure standards.

For a deeper comparison of terminology, see our sponsored tag vs rel=’sponsored’ explainer. If you are submitting a paid placement, also read the guest post pricing guide before agreeing to the terms.

Code example: sponsored link in HTML

<a href="https://example.com" rel="sponsored nofollow noopener" target="_blank">example resource</a>

Code example: editorial source link in HTML

<a href="https://developers.google.com/search/docs/appearance/links" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">Google Search Central</a>

When to use each attribute:

rel="sponsored": paid placements, affiliate-style compensation, or explicit sponsorship
rel="nofollow": links you do not want to imply endorsement or ranking credit
rel="ugc": user-generated or community-submitted links
target="_blank": external links opened in a new tab for convenience

Comparison: in-body vs author-bio link rules

Rule	In-body links	Author-bio links
Editorial purpose	Support claims and resources	Identify the author or organization
Commercial tolerance	Low unless disclosed and justified	Moderate if relevant to identity
Anchor text	Descriptive, source-led	Brand or role-based
SEO emphasis	Higher risk if overused	Lower risk, more profile-oriented

Trade-off summary: in-body links can strengthen evidence and topical authority when used sparingly, while author-bio links are safer for brand visibility because they sit outside the article’s main argument. For any paid or ambiguous placement, default to disclosure first and optimization second. That approach is both cleaner and more sustainable.

Submission process & required assets

Submission should be simple, complete, and easy for the editor to verify. Whether you submit by form or email, send one finished package rather than scattered attachments. If you are deciding between a pitch and a full draft, use the submission instructions on the page you are targeting; this section assumes you are sending the final package.

How to submit (step-by-step via form or email)

Open the submission form or email thread and read the posted instructions carefully.
Prepare your draft in a clean document with headings, links, and citations already in place.
Attach mandatory assets such as your author bio, headshot, images, and source list.
Fill in SEO fields like title tag suggestion, slug, and meta description if requested.
Double-check links and disclosures before sending.
Submit one file bundle with a clear naming convention such as AuthorName_Topic_V1.
Wait for editorial review rather than sending a second draft immediately.

If you are still sourcing target sites, use our find ‘write for us’ pages fast method to locate submission pages, then pair that with the right editorial calendars so your timing matches their publishing flow.

Mandatory assets: cover letter, author bio, headshot, images, sources list, SEO fields

Your package should normally include the following:

Cover letter: one short paragraph explaining the topic, audience, and why you are qualified
Author bio: 40–80 words, with one relevant link if allowed
Author headshot: clear, professional image in JPG or PNG
Images: screenshots, charts, or visuals referenced in the article
Sources list: URLs and citations for every factual claim
SEO fields: suggested title tag, meta description, and slug

For a clean asset package, use our guest post brief template. If you need a timing strategy before sending, compare your plan with editorial calendars and the site’s publication cadence.

Downloadable checklist callout: save this page’s final checklist as a printable PDF after you copy the asset list into your working document. The editor should not have to ask for a missing headshot or source list after review begins.

With assets in order, the next concern is process transparency: how quickly you will hear back, what revisions look like, and how to resubmit without resetting the queue.

Editorial review, timelines & revision process

Editorial review begins after the full package is received. We check topic fit, originality, citations, formatting, assets, and compliance with link and disclosure rules. Review speed depends on queue volume and the completeness of your submission. A clean first pass usually moves faster than a draft that needs multiple asset requests.

Typical review timeline and SLA for responses

1–3 business days: initial acknowledgment or intake confirmation
3–7 business days: common editorial review window for complete submissions
7–14 business days: extended timeline when fact-checking or approvals are required
Longer than 14 days: usually means the package was incomplete, the queue is full, or the topic needs extra review

If you want a more detailed benchmark on expected turnaround, compare this section with our guest post turnaround timelines. That guide explains SLA-style timing in more depth.

How edits are requested and resubmission instructions

We send edits as tracked changes, inline comments, or a short revision list. Use version control so every resubmission is clearly labeled. Recommended naming convention: AuthorName_Topic_V2_RevDate. Reply with the revised draft, not a new thread, unless the editor instructs you otherwise.

Best revision workflow:

Read every comment once before making changes.
Group changes by type: factual, structural, link, and asset updates.
Resolve the draft in a new version rather than overwriting the source copy.
Note completed fixes in your reply so the editor can confirm quickly.
Resubmit only the requested files unless additional assets are specifically asked for.

Example edit request email from the editor:

Subject: Revision request for your guest post submission

Message: “Thanks for the draft. Please add image attribution to the two screenshots, replace the commercial anchor in paragraph four with a neutral source, and tighten the intro by 40–60 words. Once updated, resend as Version 2 with the same file name pattern.”

Example author reply: “Thanks for the notes. I’ve added both attribution lines, changed the in-body link to a neutral documentation source, and shortened the introduction. I’m resending AuthorName_Topic_V2_Rev2026-05-23 for review.”

This kind of version control makes resubmission predictable and keeps the publication schedule moving. If you are comparing how different placement routes manage review speed, our manual outreach vs marketplace placement guide can help you choose the right workflow.

Compensation, paid placements & disclosures

Some submissions are free editorial contributions; others are paid guest posts or sponsored placements. We disclose the distinction up front because pricing transparency affects how the article is reviewed, labeled, and linked. If payment is part of the arrangement, the content must be labeled clearly and the link attributes must match the compensation model.

When posts are paid vs free and how fees are handled

Type	Typical review standard	Link treatment	Disclosure required?
Free editorial guest post	Highest editorial bar	Limited, evidence-based	Usually no sponsorship label
Paid guest post	Still editorial, but commercial	May use sponsored attributes	Yes, clear disclosure
Sponsored placement	Commercially reviewed	Use paid-link labeling	Yes, explicit

For benchmarks on paid placement rates referenced in this section, consult our guest post pricing guide. If fee negotiation is needed, use the tactics in negotiate sponsored post rates before final approval.

Required disclosure language for paid posts

According to Google Search Central, paid links should be clearly labeled. Use plain-language disclosure at the top or near the first commercial link, and keep it visible to readers.

Sample disclosure lines:

This article was published as sponsored content.
Disclosure: This post includes paid placement links and is labeled accordingly.
Sponsored content: The publisher received compensation for this placement.

When a paid post is approved, we may require rel="sponsored" or rel="nofollow" on relevant links. For exact terminology, see our sponsored tag vs rel=’sponsored’ guide. We use that standard because disclosure should be obvious to readers and unambiguous to search engines.

If you are submitting a digital marketing write for us article under a paid model, do not hide the commercial intent. Clear labeling protects the publication and makes the acceptance process faster.

Common reasons for rejection and quick fixes

Most rejected submissions fail for practical reasons, not because the topic is impossible. Fix the issue, then resubmit with a cleaner version naming convention and a short note summarizing what changed.

Low-quality content: Before: “10 marketing tips for growth.” After: “A 7-step attribution workflow for B2B demand teams with a source-backed template.”
Fix: add original insight, examples, and a narrower angle.
Spammy links: Before: multiple exact-match commercial anchors in the intro. After: one neutral source link and one author-bio link.
Fix: reduce links and remove promotional anchors.
Missing assets: Before: draft only. After: draft plus bio, headshot, and image credits.
Fix: submit the full asset bundle.
Format errors: Before: giant paragraphs and no H3s. After: structured H2/H3 hierarchy with readable blocks.
Fix: improve structure and spacing.
Originality issue: Before: content mirrors a competitor’s listicle. After: rewritten with unique framework and primary-source citations.
Fix: rerun plagiarism checks and rewrite copied sections.
Topic mismatch: Before: general entrepreneurship content. After: marketing operations article with a digital marketing angle.
Fix: realign the topic to niche fit and editorial discretion.

Mini-case: Author X submitted a draft that was rejected for missing image licenses and weak source attribution. The resubmission added screenshot credits, a source list, and a tighter author bio. It was accepted in 10 days after the revision because the editorial team could verify ownership and reuse rights immediately.

To avoid the same mistake, run the quality checks before publishing and keep a resubmission note that clearly states what was corrected.

Templates & copy-ready examples (author bio, disclosure, image attribution, cover letter)

Use the templates below as starting points, then personalize them to match your role and the article’s tone. Think of the author bio like the article’s business card: short, credible, and easy to verify.

Author bio example:
Jane Doe is a content strategist specializing in SEO, analytics, and B2B demand generation. She writes practical guides for marketing teams and advises clients on editorial workflow.

Cover letter template:
Hello, I’m submitting a guest post titled “[Title]” for your review. The article helps [audience] solve [problem] with a practical, source-backed framework. I’m [role] at [company], and I’ve included the draft, author bio, headshot, images, and sources list.

Disclosure template:
Disclosure: This article contains sponsored links and was submitted under a paid placement agreement.

Image attribution template:
Image by [Author/Company], used with permission. Source: [URL].

For formatting the deliverable itself, use our guest post brief template to package your title, slug, images, and SEO fields consistently.

Final submission checklist and downloadable assets

Before you send anything, use this final QA pass. If even one of these items is missing, the editor may pause review or return the package.

Topic matches the site’s niche and audience
Draft is original and plagiarism-checked
All claims have citations or source URLs
Headings use clean H2/H3 structure
Paragraphs are readable and not oversized
Links are limited, relevant, and properly attributed
Paid links, if any, are disclosed correctly
Author bio is included and accurate
Headshot is attached in a usable format
All images include attribution or proof of ownership
SEO fields are provided if requested
File names follow the required naming convention

Downloadable PDF callout: copy this checklist into your team doc and export it as a printable PDF before submission. That final QA step is the fastest way to reduce avoidable rejection and make your digital marketing submit guest post package easier to approve.

Next steps & related resources

For a complete outreach strategy that pairs with these submission rules, see our Guest Posting Outreach Guide. If you need placement planning, timing, or vendor evaluation, these resources will help you move from submission to publication with less friction.

Frequently Asked Questions

What exactly does “digital marketing write for us” mean on your site?

It means we accept contributor articles about digital marketing topics such as SEO, content, analytics, CRO, email, and paid media. Submissions must match our audience, follow our formatting and link rules, and include the required assets and disclosures if the placement is paid.

Should I pitch first or submit a full draft for a digital marketing write for us submission?

Follow the instructions on the submission page. If the page asks for a pitch, send a concise proposal first. If it asks for a full draft, submit the completed article with bio, headshot, images, and sources. Do not send only a topic idea when a finished package is required.

How many links am I allowed in a guest post and where can they be placed?

Most submissions should use 2–4 external links in the body and 1–2 links in the author bio, unless the page says otherwise. In-body links should support facts or reader action. Bio links should identify the author or organization, not push multiple commercial offers.

What image file types, sizes, and attribution are required for submissions?

Use JPG or PNG for most assets, with a 1200 × 630 px hero image and readable 1200 px-wide screenshots when possible. Every non-decorative image needs alt text. If the image is not original, include source attribution and confirm the license allows reuse.

How long does the review and publication process usually take after I submit?

Typical review takes 3–7 business days for complete submissions, though complex topics or busy queues can extend that to 7–14 business days. Incomplete asset packages usually take longer because editors must request missing files, citations, or disclosures before moving forward.

My submission was rejected — how can I fix common issues and resubmit?

Read the rejection reason carefully, fix the exact problem, and resend a clearly labeled new version. Common fixes include removing spammy links, adding image credits, improving structure, and replacing thin or copied content with original, source-backed material. Use a version name like AuthorName_Topic_V2.

Do you accept paid guest posts and how should I disclose sponsored content?

Yes, paid placements may be accepted when disclosed clearly and labeled correctly. Use plain-language disclosure near the relevant link or at the top of the article. Paid links should use appropriate rel attributes such as rel=”sponsored” or, in some cases, rel=”nofollow”.

How do you check for plagiarism and what level of originality do you require?

We require zero tolerance for plagiarism. Submissions should pass a plagiarism check such as Copyscape or Turnitin and contain original writing, original structure, and properly attributed quotes or data. Uncited copied passages, even if lightly rewritten, are not acceptable.