编辑意见为resubmission？？给了几篇文献让三天内重新提交系统

作者 tju_minifish: 来源: 小木虫 500 10 举报帖子

编辑上午回复一封，下午又回复一封，如下。请大家帮忙看看这到底是什么意思？我对照了一下格式确实没有问题啊，主要是语言问题吗？感觉第一封是套话，其实是婉拒的意思？下午却又莫名其妙的来了一封，给了三篇文献让看？这是要拒稿的节奏吗？重新提交时需要给编辑回信说明修改吗？着急，在线等！！！
（一）
On 9/5/2017 10:18 AM, Celina Zou wrote:
> Dear Dr. Liu,
>
> Thank you very much for submitting the following manuscript:
>
Unfortunately, we have decided that the article requires improvement
> before it can be considered for peer review.
>
> Please ensure also that the manuscript has been submitted using the
> correct template. Guidelines, along with Word and LaTeX templates can
> be found on the 'Instructions for Authors' page at
> https://www.mdpi.com/journal/metals/instructions/.
>
> We would like to remind you that the journal charges article
> processing charges (APC) for accepted papers. Please do not resubmit
>  your paper to this journal unless you have carefully prepared it
> according to the 'Instructions for Authors' of the journal and have
> found a source of funds to cover the APC. As Metals is an open access
> journal, after publication the full text can be accessed free of
> charge from the journal website.
>
> If the editors have suggested that your manuscript should undergo
> English editing, please address this during revision. We suggest that
> you have your manuscript checked by a native English speaking
> colleague or use a professional English editing service.
> Alternatively, MDPI provides an English editing service checking
> grammar, spelling, punctuation and some improvement of style where
> necessary for an additional charge (extensive re-writing is not
> included), see details at https://www.mdpi.com/authors/english.
>
> Once you have modified your manuscript, you may resubmit it at

（二）
Dear Dr. Liu,

I'm writing this letter to let you informed of the academic editor's
comments shown as below:

Paper is quasi-ready to go through the peer-review process. Howevers
some related works are missed. Fatigue and testing has recently change
some old views about effects disregarded in the past. For instance the
Manufacturing method of coupons, see Experimental Techniques 40 (6),
1555-1565. The paper must rearrange the state of the art in order to
increase the odds to be accepted. This journal of SEM is important,
please check the work and others. Welding pores can be a serious
drawback in fatigue. Figure 1 is very related with the work proposed.
See also, Evolution of residual stress redistribution associated with
localized surface microcracking in shot-peened medium-carbon steel
during fatigue test, Pages 147-157, Jong-Cheon Kim, Seong-Kyun Cheong,
Hiroshi Noguchi
Regarding the link of the findings with design, please discuss the
matter, as it is done in International Journal of Fatigue,  Volume 55,
October 2013,  Pages 230-244, brings a fresh view of fatigue calculus.
"

Please revise your manuscript according to the above comments and
resubmit your revised version into the system in 3 days. If there is any
questions, please feel free to contact me.

Thank you for your cooperation. Looking forward to hearing from you soon.

Best regards,

Celina Zou, MSc.
Assistant Editor
E-Mail: celina.zou@mdpi.com 返回小木虫查看更多

今日热帖