Not understanding the rejection...

I just got rejected for adding features to the Tetris page and here's what the rejection said:

"Thank you for the submission, but this content appears to have been lifted from a GameSpot review."

And here's the note I wrote with the submission:

"Adds the titles History and the section Features to the main article. The Features comes from a review I wrote last year."

I realize that I can automatically edit the article myself, but I figured I'd get some clarity here first-hand before I go doing that. A moderator just not read my comment?

If it's actually your work, use it. What the deal was with the mod? *shrug*

You're submission would have been rejected because a search found that the edit was lifted or copied from another source on the internet. Even if you copy and paste some information you wrote on another website to GiantBomb its still going to get rejected. We want users to come up with original submissions and not copy, plaguerise or re-use reviews or information they've posted on another website.

In the future try to rewrite articles for games instead of copying them from websites you've written for in the past.

But it is original. It's my writing. Would it be fine if I just remove my review from GameSpot?

"But it is original. It's my writing. Would it be fine if I just remove my review from GameSpot?
"

if you removed it you'd probably be good but they don't know for sure that you wrote that feature on gamespot so they think you might be plagiarizing it.

"if you removed it you'd probably be good but they don't know for sure that you wrote that feature on gamespot so they think you might be plagiarizing it.
"

I'm a woman, just to correct you.

In any case, I can understand the copywright issues, but the originality part I can not. If I had written that review 10 years ago, never published it, and stored it in the meantime until I decided to add some of that material onto this site, would that be considered an unacceptable entry? I do not think so. And yes, it is hard to rewrite something that I've already wrote. Not impossible granted, but it's hard, for me at the least.

Edit: Just deleted the review from GS, but it's still showing up on Google's cache. Oh well.

"I'm a woman, just to correct you.

In any case, I can understand the copywright issues, but the originality part I can not. If I had written that review 10 years ago, never published it, and stored it in the meantime until I decided to add some of that material onto this site, would that be considered an unacceptable entry? I do not think so. And yes, it is hard to rewrite something that I've already wrote. Not impossible granted, but it's hard, for me at the least.

Edit: Just deleted the review from GS, but it's still showing up on Google's cache. Oh well.
"

As Hamz mentioned, we unfortunately have no way to verify that a person claiming to be the original author of submitted material is in fact that person. It's not that we don't trust you, but you can certainly see the potential for abuse if we took all claims of authorship at face value.