之前在这个期刊上中过一篇文章，也被这个期刊以内容不符拒过一篇文章（之后改投其他期刊了）。目前这篇文章无论是内容还是质量，我觉得都特别适合这个期刊，初审刚刚3个月返回了2位审稿人的意见，内容如下;

Reviewer 1：
    Read throughout this m/s, I failed to find out the taking-home message. The aims and objectives are unclear and details are missing. So I can not recommend it to be published in ×××. My concerns are given below:
    1)        The English academic writing should be largely improved as somewhere it is difficult to get understood. Also, there are some typos in the m/s, for example, in Page 8, Line 42, “continuum” should be “continue”.
    2)        The formation of ××× is rather complicated in ×××. Considering the ××× seems unreasonable. And why the ×××? Is there a specific reason to place such ××× objectives?
    ......
   9)        In the Appendix, why the time-dependent term in equation (23) is negligible?
    列了9条问题，其中质疑了模型中的假设，还有一条是一个单词拼写错误，这篇文章是经过 Elsevier 润色过的，也是我真的有点大意，让审稿人觉得我太不认真了吧，这个期刊限定字数，好多内容是我投稿前删掉了的。
   
Reviewer 2 :
   This paper investigated the ×××. The topic is of widely interests for ××× scientific field. This work may be considered for publication after a minor revision.
    后边列出了10条详细的修改意见。

   最后副主编给的意见是：
     There are at times conflicting recommendations by reviewers to submitted manuscripts.  This is one of those occasions.  After consultation with the editorial team we will not be considering this manuscript for publication.

     Thank you for considering××× for the publication of your research. I hope the outcome of this specific submission will not discourage you from submitting future manuscripts.

    各位前辈们，审稿人的意见我基本都能修改好，只是编辑并没有建议我修改后重投，我想问问大家，这样的情况，我修改后继续投这个期刊还有被接收的希望么？ 先谢谢各位的意见和建议了！

 返回小木虫查看更多