投了一个我们领域很好的期刊。第一次9.24返回，编辑9.30回复如下
editor comments:   
1.  The response to reviewers comments document should follow the format given in the manuscript website. You need to initially list each reviewer comment and then provide the detailed response to each comment individually. If any changes are undertaken in the manuscript in response to a comment, the exact correction undertaken should be repeated (cut-and-paste the revision undertaken) after the reviewer comment including the location in the manuscript (line and page number). Just confirming that you attended to a comment is not sufficient.
as your manuscript was deemed to require major revisions, it will be sent back to the same reviewers to assess whether their concerns have been satisfactorily addressed in the revisions undertaken. this request is being made for the ease of re-review.
2. as requested, can you please also confirm that you have attended to all of the editorial comments given in the first email.  

我觉得自己第一条就是按要求改的，还以为编辑是说2第2条呢“没有在cover letter 中一一列出并回复编辑的问题”，所以就一一回复了提交了
没想到编辑当天又发让重改如下。还是对第一条不满意 。
editor comments:   
the revision documents are not satisfactory. can you please prepare the response to reviewers comments document as noted in the first email (editorial comment 4) and the second email (editorial comment 1).  

现在有点想法了，但是还是怕自己考虑不周全。请学长们看看之前你们遇到过这种情况吗。非常感谢！




回复审稿人意见1.png





回复审稿人意见2.png



回复审稿人意见3.png 返回小木虫查看更多