| 查看: 7814 | 回复: 54 | |||
| 当前只显示满足指定条件的回帖，点击这里查看本话题的所有回帖 | |||
bobvan至尊木虫 (文坛精英)
|
[交流]
投稿 Ceramics International 碰到的奇葩事已有34人参与
|
||
|
下面的内容是我放到 sci 评论版块的，是关于投稿 ceramics international 碰到的奇葩事。由于那里只能点赞，不能评论，我将它放在这里，欢迎大家评论。 上个星期刚投该期刊两天，就收到被拒通知，理由是 due to an extremely high number of submissions to the journal, we are unable to consider your manuscript。 我立马就给怒怼回去了，具体内容如下。 dear editors, i'm very disappointed about the decision particularly the reason for rejection (due to an extremely high number of submissions to the journal, we are unable to consider your manuscript). don't you think this reason is too absurd? frankly, as an associate editor for rsc advances, i have prescreened lots of manuscripts (a prescreen rate of 67% in the fourth quarter of 2018 (october - december)), but i have never used such ridiculous reason to prescreen a manuscript. instead, i examined each manuscript very carefully to decide if it deserved a peer review. if not, a detailed reason such as the novelty is not sufficiently high for publication because similar researches (references provided here) have been performed previously, or this study does not significantly advance the development in this field compared with the previous studies (followed by the reason why). therefore, if you would like to prescreen a manuscript, please modify the template. i have prepared a template for you, which is still disputable, but i think it is much acceptable than the template you used, namely, this journal receives many more papers than we can possibly publish and, as a result, we put a premium on novelty of research, its potential impact, the clarity of the presentation, and the relationship between the research and topics that are of greatest interest to our readers. as an editor, i hope we can respect our authors more. as we know, authors spent a long time to follow the guidelines of the journal to prepare a manuscript and then also a long time to submit their manuscript following the steps set by the journal, and thus we should not only spend a couple of minutes in prescreening the manuscript using such an unacceptable template. 怼回去后，该编辑没有回应，第二天接作怼，还是没有回应。去手稿提交系统怼，也是没回应！这次我就更不客气了，告诉编辑，如果真是这样 （due to an extremely high number of submissions to the journal, we are unable to consider your manuscript ），编辑部应该关闭投稿系统，别浪费作者们的精力去准备稿子和投稿！该编辑还是没有回应。我估计那位编辑已经被我的回击吓得不敢轻举妄动了。 看他没动静，我前两天又将手稿做了必要的校正包括标题，但今日又收到拒稿消息。原因不再是简单的 due to an extremely high number of submissions to the journal, we are unable to consider your manuscript。而是多了 一点新内容：furthermore, the paper suffers of poor english grammar and sentences construction. for possible future submissions, please note that only papers written in adequate language are submitted to the review process. 我不是吃素的，当然不认可他的理由，当即回复如下： "the paper suffers of poor english grammar and sentences construction" is also an unacceptable excuse for prescreening. first, i have co-authored over 100 sci papers in high-profile journals, and none of my (our) submissions has been prescreened by any journal due to the poor english grammar issue. in addition, as an associate editor (ae) for rsc advances i was told by the publishing editor of this journal that ae should not prescreen a manuscript only because the english is not good. ae should focus more on the novelty of a study rather than english as long as english is not so poor for understanding. a publishing editor will correct any errors in english grammar when the manuscript is processed for publication. therefore, i think it would be better for you to ask authors to polish english after a peer review process which indicates the manuscript deserves a publication after a revision. thank you anyway for spending more time on finding a more detailed reason to prescreen my manuscript. 另外：我也告诉他将来我不会再投他们期刊了，如果他们不能保证避免这种学术欺凌！ 我今天就编辑提出的“the paper suffers of poor english grammar and sentences construction”这一说法询问了一位在英国出生及长大目前在加拿大工作的同事，问他是否可以使用 suffer of。 那位同事斩钉截铁地说，只有 suffer from 这一说法。除此之外，他指出这个句子也还有其它的错误。正确的用法应该是：the paper offers poor english grammar！我当初也是这么想，但我在给该编辑的回复中虽然教育了他很多，但我没有指出他自己的英语水平有多糟糕。我担心说出来后他会羞得一头撞死！当然，这个编辑还是有一点值得称道：那就是每篇稿子都过目，且做出送审与不送审的决定很迅速。当然，没有被他送审的稿件很多是值得送审甚至发表的，只是由于他的武断加上傲慢无知才被扼杀了。我希望通过我和他这次争锋相对，能让他在处理稿件时作出更大改进，不再鲁莽行事。这对该期刊的作者及期刊本身的名声都有利。当然，我从今以后再也不会投稿该期刊了，除非该编辑向我道歉！ 后记 最近半年内本人发表了三篇英文综述文章， 其中一篇发在 EES 上 （Energy Environ. Sci. 2019, DOI: 10.1039/C9EE00717B）， 全文 5 万 1 千多 个 Words，投稿过程中我们没有找过任何专门的语言机构润色英语，全靠我们自己精琢细雕。上个星期，接收的文章 Proof 的时候出版编辑也没有要求我们更正任何一个句子。可见，我们的英语并非这个奇葩编辑说的那样差。倒是他那么简单的一句话，错误百出，让人贻笑大方。 至于别人是否遇到这种事的时候是否去怼编辑是他们自己的事，我是怼了，而且我从没觉得我这样做有什么不对，因此我不会接受任何人指责。 [ Last edited by bobvan on 2019-5-22 at 15:09 ] |
回复此楼» 本帖已获得的红花（最新10朵）
yingzan163» 猜你喜欢
为什么石墨样氮化碳会拍出来这么诡异的TEM照片
已经有13人回复
-
说同学对待毕业论文不认真后她很不悦
已经有8人回复
-
博士后和科研助理好难找啊
已经有11人回复
-
科研压力大，掉头发怎么办
已经有9人回复
-
关于公布2024年度国家自然科学基金项目申请初审结果的通告
已经有12人回复
-
材料方向24博士申请/一作SCI三篇
已经有6人回复
-
国家重点实验室基金，通知去答辩。希望大不？
已经有8人回复
-
博士申请
已经有6人回复
-
今年面上预计又打酱油了
已经有8人回复
-
失之东隅 收之桑榆
已经有25人回复
18213818611
金虫 (著名写手)
- 应助: 5 (幼儿园)
- 金币: 2849
- 散金: 1786
- 红花: 22
- 帖子: 1218
- 在线: 640.5小时
- 虫号: 4315434
- 注册: 2015-12-27
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 理论和计算化学
24楼2019-02-26 17:58:05
18213818611
金虫 (著名写手)
- 应助: 5 (幼儿园)
- 金币: 2849
- 散金: 1786
- 红花: 22
- 帖子: 1218
- 在线: 640.5小时
- 虫号: 4315434
- 注册: 2015-12-27
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 理论和计算化学
25楼2019-02-26 18:02:41
8