Crown, thanks for that link, that's gold right there. Thanks again!
Yes it is indeed; yet both of you should look at the post by Jordan very carefully. I will quote the sections which apply most closely to
@DIY Garage's situation.
"
REMOVED FOR REUSED CONTENT
My content is completely original or I significantly transform the work, so why was I removed for Reused Content?
We sometimes make mistakes during the review process – this may happen if your channel is lacking context or information about the creative value you’re adding to make the content unique. Keep in mind that abusers try to blend in with legitimate channels,
so if you’re not adding significant original commentary, narration, or clear educational value to the repurposed content, and there’s no indication anywhere of how you’ve transformed the work, then the review team is lacking all of this info during the review process."
I m curious as to why Jordan keeps harping on the word "repurposed", when the first part of the header is "My content is completely original". If something is completely original there is by very definition of the term, no repurposed content present.
And...
"
Are there any other best practices to show YouTube my content is unique?
The best possible scenario is for the unique value to be clear when watching your video. The spirit of the Reused Content policy is to make sure we’re incentivizing unique and original content into YPP and that we’re protecting and rewarding the creators who work hard on original content.
Here are some best practices:
- Add commentary or show your presence in your videos (voice or on screen)
- Link back to your YouTube channel from your official website and vice versa
- Provide more context about your work in your video and channel descriptions
- Have a featured video where you talk about your channel and how your work"
The bolded emphasis is my own on the bullet-item. Here we have at the same time, @TeamYouTube saying "no it's not necessary"; while Jordan, whose header clearly states he is a Google Employee on Team YouTube citing that very thing as a "best practice". Indeed that is at the top of the best practices list!
Finally...
"
I’ve made changes to my content and re-applied, but I’m still not approved?
Your channel may not be approved for the YouTube Partner Program if you’re only making minor changes. If you're going to create content that primarily draws from other sources, then we encourage you to focus on transforming the original work and giving it new creative perspective or meaning. We’d recommend making additional changes to your overall content strategy and/or adding more context to your channel, and re-applying to YPP in 30 days."
Jordan still seems to be "assuming" that most people who have this issue are repurposing the content of others, and does
nothing to address the concerns of those with fully original content who are denied more than once.
A less than satisfactory answer IMHO.
