Weird verification.

Alamy, Dreamstime, and others accept almost anything. They say high-quality standards, but that statement is meaningless. (In my view.)

There are a lot of bad photos on there - but they do seem to sell though!! - Surprisingly!

Adobe Stock customers expect highest visual and technical quality for their commercial print and digital ad campaigns. Nothing else will do.

• https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/reasons-for-content-rejection.html
• https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/quality-and-technical-issues.html

If you're unsure why your work is being rejected, compare it with that of other experienced Stock contributors in the same keyword categories. 

Ask yourself, "would I buy this image and what would I use it for?"  If the answer is "I don't know," then your image is probably not what Adobe Stock customers are looking for.  

But don't be discouraged.  It takes time to develop a good portfolio.  If it was easy, professional photographers wouldn't exist 🙂

No idea what you want to say! Quality requirements change between stock services and Adobe is known to be picky on quality issues, real quality issues that do not trouble other providers. However, sales are better (for me) on Adobe than on other platforms. Correlation?