| 查看: 2929 | 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
售SCI-T0P文章，我:8O.5.5.1.O.54,科目齐全,可+急
已经有5人回复
-
售SCI一区T0P文章，我:8O.55.1.O.5.4,科目齐全,可+急
已经有4人回复
-
上海工程技术大学 激光智能制造课题组 2027级博士研究生招生
已经有6人回复
-
课题组招2027级博士 上海工程技术大学 激光智能制造方向
已经有6人回复
-
现代”学阀”该如何界定
已经有14人回复
-
求合成方法
已经有8人回复
-
师弟论文见刊大半年才想起来申请专利，还能抢救一下吗？
已经有4人回复
-
有机合成以后会不会被AI改变？做科研的虫友怎么看
已经有8人回复
-
我的奶奶
已经有3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:
-
坐标无锡，诚征女友
+3/973
-
2026年材料结构与力学性能国际会议（MSMP 2026
+1/932
-
2026年物理学、化学与数据分析国际会议 (PCDA 2026)
+1/902
-
2027年电气工程、自动化与应用工程国际会议（EEAE 2027）
+1/857
-
2027年生物医学、农业与可持续发展国际会议（BASD 2027）
+1/835
-
2027年计算机视觉、设计与非遗文化传播国际会议（CVDC 2027）
+1/810
-
持续创业者，A8离异男征婚，事业遇到瓶颈，寻找生活伴侣
+1/294
-
石河子大学能源与材料学院李航副教授课题组招收硕、博士
+1/98
-
南科大薛亚辉课题组诚聘离子输运、二维材料、原子力显微镜等方向“快响行动”博士生
+1/96
-
南方科技大学力航系急招收纳米材料、力学、机械等方向推免硕士研究生两名
+1/94
-
石河子大学能源与材料学院李航副教授课题组招收硕、博士
+1/87
-
澳门大学孙鹏展博士课题组招收全奖博士研究生1名
+2/74
-
韩国全北国立大学禽病研究所博士研究生招生简章
+2/48
-
废油资源化教育部工程中心 诚聘催化方向特聘研究员
+1/10
-
大湾区大学姚瑶课题组2027届博士生招生 （与中山大学联合培养）
+1/6
-
从靶点发现到机制验证，肿瘤免疫治疗研究为什么离不开高质量抗体？
+1/1
-
CAR表达怎么测？定点荧光标记蛋白让流式细胞检测更直接
+1/1
-
中山大学中山医学院(深圳校区)-肿瘤细胞生物课题组招收联培（客座）硕士/博士生
+1/1
-
国家纳米科学中心孙向南课题组招收2027届硕士1名
+1/1
-
国家纳米科学中心孙向南课题组招收2027级硕士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