24小时热门版块排行榜

返回列表

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

sign

金虫 (小有名气)

应助: 0 (幼儿园)
金币: 1206.9
帖子: 86
在线: 110.7小时
虫号: 57201
注册: 2005-01-29
专业: 合成药物化学

[交流] (决对原创)我一篇投稿文章的审稿人意见已有3人参与

Reviewer #2: This is a very interesting ****study with quite intriguing results that is significantly marred by bad grammar and poor organization. Fortunately for the author I believe the same errors are repeated over and over again, so with some judicious use of cut and paste, most could be fixed with little effort. The only reason I waded through the confusing details of this paper to get to the scientifically interesting nuggets was that the authors seem to have put together a nice combination of *** and the results were pretty conclusive and should lead to further development in this area. So I will only list my suggested revisions of a scientific nature that will in my opinion make the paper more accurate and acceptable to others in the field. I will refrain from making some much-needed suggestions of a more editorial nature, but instead leave any decisions about
importance of grammar and organization to the discretion of the journal editor and staff.

In general, the authors need to be careful not to over generalize their (very nice) results, and to clearly distinguish between what they actually proved experimentally in this study from what they think the future implications of their work will be. This is a research article, not a grant application!!!

老外写得很有意思，也了解自己英语水平很poor

[ Last edited by lby1258 on 2010-6-4 at 21:41 ]

回复此楼