| 查看: 1527 | 回复: 3 | |||
| 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 | |||
lkd-syl金虫 (著名写手)
快乐家族
|
[交流]
拒稿重投，不知道结局会怎么样已有3人参与
|
||
|
May-2020 Dear Dr ###: Your manuscript entitled "。。。。" which you submitted to 。。。, has been reviewed. The reviewer comments are included at the bottom of this letter. I regret to inform you that the reviewers have raised serious concerns, and therefore your paper cannot be accepted for publication in ****. However since the reviewers do find some merit in the paper, I would be willing to reconsider if you wish to undertake major revisions and re-submit, addressing the referees' concerns. Please note that resubmitting your manuscript does not guarantee eventual acceptance, and that your resubmission will be subject to re-review before a decision is rendered. You will be unable to make your revisions on the originally submitted version of your manuscript. Instead, revise your manuscript using a word processing program and save it on your computer. Because we are trying to facilitate timely publication of manuscripts submitted to ###, your revised manuscript should be uploaded as soon as possible. If it is not possible for you to submit your revision within a reasonable amount of time, we will consider your paper as a new submission. I look forward to a resubmission. Sincerely, Dr ### Editor in Chief, ；；；； This paper should be rejected. It is written carelessly. Figure *: can not see anything, can not even read the scale bar. （实际能看清，只是有些模糊） What is shown in Figure 2. I really can not tell. There are various grey shades. What are they. （原图比较模糊） References are in the wrong format. Author gives black and white figures and suddenly switches to the colored figures. Why? For the print version of the paper, we do not accept colored figures. Add references suggested by one of the reviewers. Reviewer(s)' Comments to Author: Reviewer: 1 Comments to the Author Dear Sir I appreciate your research on ###. good luck. Reviewer: 2 Comments to the Author This article discusses the 。。。。 by various processes, including ####. As much, the matter is of interest. However, there exist many small problems. 1. In “Introduction” part, lines ￥￥￥ are the basic principles of @@@, the author should be deleted. 2. In “@@@” part, the ** contains @ and @@ methods and the author only presents the main reactions of @ method. 3. In addition to the #, what is the difference between the ！！ and the %? 4. In “##” part, DD procedures were taken into consideration to %%, and in the …………, why not consider other ￥￥￥? Reviewer: 3 Comments to the Author In the current review manuscript, authors have attempted to review the research updates on the ￥￥￥. The review article is well written with ***. However, the review looks like very large and needs to be shorten further. Author may agree that there are several article on review on &&&. So, effort need to be made for the revision of the article to make it accept in this journal through better interpretation using ***. The paper needs a revision on the %. The article should revise based on the comments raised and request to revise the review article accordingly. However, there are a few points mentioned below which need to be addressed before publication: • *** 下边有十来条意见，其中有一些比较笼统，像大致该按何种方式写等，并且看出来这个专家不是我们领域的（相近领域），因为他提的修改有几条不是那么切题，另列出了十来篇文献让引用（基本都是这个刊物的），感觉审稿意见也算是正面，不知道编辑为啥拒稿，这个重投好好修改不知道接收几率有多大， PS：图像问题较大，很多图片都改了，连着几天个弄得迷迷糊糊的，但愿能有好运吧，今年预测该刊影响力飙升。。。 |
回复此楼» 猜你喜欢
发现督导在听课，需要跟TA招呼示意吗？有同学看手机、课件有疏漏算大问题吗？
已经有4人回复
-
催稿后秒拒
已经有6人回复
-
前同事拿我以前未中的国自然标书申请今年的国自然，现在基金委发来调查函
已经有10人回复
-
想问一下有没有需要文章但是没时间带学生的研究生导师。
已经有17人回复
-
298求调剂
已经有9人回复
-
申请省自然科学基金，研究区能否是省外区域
已经有13人回复
-
国内科研环境差导致国内科研水平差的根源
已经有3人回复
-
CSC在职申请求问
已经有7人回复
-
家乡二本高校/沿海传统私企，如何抉择？
已经有15人回复
-
哎
已经有6人回复
10