| 查看: 2421 | 回复: 7 | ||||
| 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 | ||||
[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
336求调剂
已经有3人回复
-
286求调剂
已经有3人回复
-
一志愿华中科技大学071000，求调剂
已经有3人回复
-
279分求调剂 一志愿211
已经有14人回复
-
332求调剂
已经有3人回复
-
0856材料专硕353求调剂
已经有3人回复
-
材料学学硕080502 337求调剂-一志愿华中科技大学
已经有5人回复
-
085601调剂 358分
已经有4人回复
-
0856 271求调剂
已经有3人回复
-
能源材料化学课题组招收硕士研究生8-10名
已经有15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:
-
祈福中标
+1/236
-
福建师范大学叶应祥课题组招收2026级博士研究生
+2/160
-
福建师范大学叶应祥课题组招收2026级博士研究生
+2/154
-
深圳技术大学集成电路与光电芯片学院郝俊杰课题组诚聘博士后、研究助理、访问学生
+2/114
-
材料、化学类硕士研究生调剂机会，学硕专硕均可，有意请联系，非诚勿扰！
+1/88
-
吲哚美辛原料药合成交流
+1/35
-
2026 物理方向招收部分调剂
+1/35
-
刚刚工作不久的孤独感
+1/34
-
福建师范大学闽江学者陈巍教授团队招收2026年化学、化工或材料专业的学硕6名
+1/33
-
南京林业大学-国家级青年人才团队 招2026级博士、硕士（合成化学、植物化学方向）
+1/21
-
招聘科研助理——储能方向（储能、流体传热、CFD模拟）
+1/17
-
南京林业大学-国家级青年人才团队 招2026级申请考核制博士（合成化学、植物化学方向）
+1/14
-
宁波东方理工大学余鹏课题组2026年上海交大联培博士生、博士后、科研助理招聘
+1/12
-
青岛科技大学化工学院院士团队2026年拟招收全日制博士研究生1名
+1/8
-
福州大学国家级人才汤育欣教授课题组2026年招收”申请考核制“储能电池方向博士研究生
+1/6
-
香港大学David Srolovitz教授课题组招聘「香江学者」博士后
+1/6
-
新加坡国立大学药学系化学生物学课题组招PhD
+1/6
-
Top-88悉尼科技大学数据科学/AI 招收2027年入学 校奖 博士生1到2名(国际和本地学生）
+1/5
-
昆明理工大学陈江照教授团队博士招生
+1/4
-
【第三轮招生】澳科大诚招2026秋全奖博士研究生（纳米医学/生物材料，3月31号截止）
+1/3
4楼2011-01-16 19:39:52
2楼2011-01-16 18:25:37
3楼2011-01-16 19:16:28
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
