| 查看: 2972 | 回复: 7 | ||||
[交流]
请教organic letter 如何申诉？
|
|
请教各位高手, 稿件被拒，但是觉得拒的不合理，如何进行organic letter 申诉？在什么条件下可以申诉？申诉应该注意那些问题？ [ Last edited by 小皮憨妮8692 on 2011-1-16 at 15:50 ] |
回复此楼» 收录本帖的淘帖专辑推荐
 淘帖 |
» 猜你喜欢
关于核磁制样
已经有3人回复
-
郑州大学申博
已经有6人回复
-
人工智能虚构史料、伪造文献频现，多家期刊声明抵制
已经有5人回复
-
CsPbI2Br全无机钙钛矿SEM图像异常分析
已经有8人回复
-
申请科研项目纯靠实力能成功吗？
已经有12人回复
» 本主题相关价值贴推荐，对您同样有帮助:
- 请教大侠们：cover letter里面能不能有new novel 这样的字眼？
已经有4人回复
- 请问投Organic Letter 难度大不大？
已经有13人回复
- catalysis letter 拒稿后能申诉么？
已经有5人回复
- 请教communication，letter的区别
已经有6人回复
- 第一次投稿SCI收到的Decision Letter，另请教问题一个
已经有11人回复
- 【其他】请教如何请老师发recommend letter
已经有4人回复
- 《Organic Letter》投稿过程 by liangdawei
已经有5人回复
- paper给编辑reject，请教申诉
已经有27人回复
- 请教View Letter问题
已经有4人回复
- 如何增加Appeal的成功率！--文章被拒申诉成功的见解
已经有59人回复
» 抢金币啦！回帖就可以得到:
-
电子科技大学电子科学与工程学院向全军教授2027年博士研究生招生
+2/472
-
诚征女友
+1/463
-
高原交汇区水资源安全与水环境保护教育部重点实验室海内外高层次人才招聘公告
+1/92
-
昆明 征女友
+1/87
-
山东征女友，坐标济南
+1/80
-
香港城市大学（东莞）雷进程课题组博士研究生、研究助理招聘
+1/45
-
关于食品方向的刊物，发表难度低点的
+1/39
-
【招生】国家级人才王新才教授课题组招收2027级“申请-考核”制博士研究生
+1/36
-
中山大学柔性电子方向，博士招生/博士后招聘（材料、材料加工、化学、化工等背景）
+1/33
-
凝胶渗透色谱求助
+5/30
-
香港科技大学（广州）段圭粤课题组招收风能与流体力学方向博士生、研究助理、博士后
+1/19
-
博士名额申请
+1/8
-
gpt官方代充
+1/7
-
某知名美资公司招应用工程师（AS， 北京）
+1/6
-
AI3T 2026 第一届人工智能基础设施与互联技术国际会议
+1/5
-
华南理工大学无线柔性电子课题组2027级博士生招生：无线传输与低功耗电路方向（1名）
+1/5
-
【2027级博士申请】双非硕・一作 SCI 3 篇（2篇CEJ 一区 Top）储能方向
+1/5
-
东北大学招收2027级硕士、博士研究生（推免、报考）凝聚态物理/微电子/电子等相关方向
+1/3
-
癌症九大特征：肿瘤生物学研究的核心理论框架与蛋白检测策略
+1/1
-
中原工学院智能感知与仪器学院招聘在编教师1名
+1/1
2楼2011-01-16 18:25:37
3楼2011-01-16 19:16:28
4楼2011-01-16 19:39:52
小皮憨妮8692(金币+5): 2011-01-16 21:53:20
|
[quote]Originally posted by 小皮憨妮8692 at 2011-01-16 12:16:28: 想跟您问下您有没有过申诉经历？我是新手，不是很懂。要不要一一的回复审稿人的意见？原稿件中要不要修改，比如说要加入的数据，或者是语法或格式的修改这样的？多谢！如果方便的话，能不能给我发份申诉信?十分 ... [/q 我没有申述过！ 给你一些模板吧，谨慎使用： Dear Editor Thank you and the reviewers very much for your helpful and kindly comments on our manuscript titled "…" . However, we think that your decision on refusing publication of this work in your journal is cursory, inappropriate and disappointing. At first, this work has its important practice significance and application values in … Unfortunately, …. We carried out this work in order to … Second, Journal of … as the first-rate journal in … should accept the publication of the important work in this journal. … Third, this work related to … is within the scope of this journal. We believe that this paper is suitable for the journal, because the Journal publishes research results dealing with… with a focus on original research representing complete studies, rather than incremental studies, and the topics covered include …, in particular, it covers … In a word, we mightily ask you to reconsider the publication of this work in your journal, and hope that you can make a positive decision which is beneficial to…in the world and can improve the quality of the manuscript according to the comments of the reviewers. With best wishes, Sincerely， … 作者: zhxd86 发布日期: 2008-10-27 Dear editor: Author would like to thank reviewing the manuscript by referee. Indded, some unnecessary spelling error is existed, and author feel embarrassed. This can due to careless omission and poor english. However,auther feel that the revised chance should be given for improving the manusript, because author conceive that the paper quality is not so bad. Author has read the suggestions from the reviewer, and conceive that the paper can be revised as following: 1.The more clear figure. 2.Improving the english. 3.The more calculated details. 4.Rewriten the Abstract and Conclusions. Author hope that the editor can give the revised chance,and give some appropriate tolerance for the young and non-native author. After all, the most important is paper quality. Meanwhile, author suggest that the e-mail should also be sent to reviewer. Thank your very much. Best Regards 作者: woodbeing 发布日期: 2008-10-27 偶最近自己写的，申述是成功了。但文章还在审稿中。。。 Dear editor, This mail comes to request a chance for reconsidering our manuscript (No. XXX) submitted to the Journal of Applied Physics. "Name of your manuscript" (No. XXX) Our manuscript can be roughly divided into two parts, XX and XX, respectively. The first part, as evaluated by the referee, "is a worthwhile effort". For the second part, the referee pointed out three questions on the completeness of the physical explanation of our data. As to the three questions, we admit that one or two are indeed neglected by us in the original manuscript and following the referee's advice we have made some substantial revisions. After the revisions, we are sure, we have well handled all the three questions in the report and the referee will be ready to accept the new manuscript. The recommendation of the original manuscript from the referee is "Major Revision". Besides, at the end of the report his/her thinks "After that (address the three questions) the revised manuscript can be reviewed again to determine its suitability for publication." Together with the positive evaluation of the first part of our manuscript, all of these deliver us the information that the referee is expecting our revised manuscript. Thus, we ask for an new evaluation from the original referee for the revised version. We are very confident of the quality of the new manuscript and believe that it now meets the standard of the Journal of Applied Physics. Please note that the editor has rejected our original manuscript and the online submission for revised version does not show up. If you are willing to take our request and send our revised version to the original referee, please tell us how to submit the revised version. Dear Editor, As the corresponding author, I received an e-mail which informed me that our manuscript (ID xxxxxxx) has been rejected. A referee’s report, as a standard procedure, has been attached to it. I have not the slightest grudge against the rejection. However, the referee’s report is quite unconvincing, or, if I may say, somewhat irresponsible. I understand that Inorganic Chemistry is an honorable organization which has a distinct reputation of being most conscientious toward all the submissions around the world. Those careless remarks in the report might jeopardize the good image which Inorganic Chemistry has been well upholding. So I consider it a self-imposed obligation to point it out. Just for the sake of argument, please allow me to cite the second referee's report below. Quote: (1)xxxx (2)xxxxx .................. There are mainly 3 arguments against our manuscript. (1)xxxxx (2)xxxx ...... It’s absurd for the referee to accuse us for the error we are striving to correct, and it’s also narrow-minded for him to deny any other theories that he hasn’t met or could not comprehend. So, I’m not content with the remarks this referee made. Since I haven’t found a second referee who can provide some potent opinions, I am hereby appealing for reconsideration. Please appoint us a new unbiased referee. Thank you very much for your patience and understanding. |
5楼2011-01-16 19:43:48
6楼2011-01-16 19:44:37
7楼2011-01-16 22:12:24
8楼2011-01-16 22:30:22