应《网络安全法》要求，自2017年10月1日起，未进行实名认证将不得使用互联网跟帖服务。为保障您的帐号能够正常使用，请尽快对帐号进行手机号验证，感谢您的理解与支持！

24小时热门版块排行榜    

小木虫论坛-学术科研互动平台 » 学术交流区 » 论文投稿 » 投稿求助 » 请教organic letter 如何申诉？
51/1返回列表
查看: 2363  |  回复: 7
只看楼主 @他人 存档 新回复提醒 (忽略) 收藏    在APP中查看
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

小皮憨妮8692

金虫 (著名写手)

[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

» 本主题相关价值贴推荐，对您同样有帮助:

» 抢金币啦！回帖就可以得到:

查看全部散金贴
1楼 2011-01-16 15:49:21
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

drj021

铁杆木虫 (著名写手)
小皮憨妮8692(金币+5): 2011-04-15 10:26:45
申述是很有机会的，很多人都有过申诉最终文章被接受的经历，主要是反驳审稿人的意见，说出自己的理由，但是语气一定要委婉，如果主编觉得你说的在理，一般会再让其他审稿人再审，祝你好运！
赞一下(1人) 回复此楼
4楼2011-01-16 19:39:52
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖
查看全部 8 个回答

croninszl

铁杆木虫 (职业作家)
小皮憨妮8692(金币+5): 多谢! 2011-01-16 19:16:41
你在网上嗖嗖，因该很多的。小木虫应该也有。

直接写信给那个负责你稿件的主编，提出合适的理由。
1。首先感谢主编和审稿人的好的意见和建议，以及辛苦工作。
2。但我们对某个审稿人提出的xx觉得很xx,审稿意见很不合理。。。。。。
3。提出他们审稿意见的不当指出。详细列举理由，证据最重要。
4。希望该主编能在考虑或者重新审一下该稿件。

态度要好！！！！
自己查查吧。
好运！
赞一下 回复此楼
2楼2011-01-16 18:25:37
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

小皮憨妮8692

金虫 (著名写手)
引用回帖:
Originally posted by croninszl at 2011-01-16 18:25:37:
你在网上嗖嗖，因该很多的。小木虫应该也有。

直接写信给那个负责你稿件的主编，提出合适的理由。
1。首先感谢主编和审稿人的好的意见和建议，以及辛苦工作。
2。但我们对某个审稿人提出的xx觉得很xx,审稿意 ...

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?十分感谢！

[ Last edited by 小皮憨妮8692 on 2011-1-16 at 19:18 ]
赞一下 回复此楼
3楼2011-01-16 19:16:28
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

croninszl

铁杆木虫 (职业作家)
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.
赞一下(2人) 回复此楼
5楼2011-01-16 19:43:48
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖
查看全部 8 个回答
普通表情 龙 兔 虎 猫 高级回复 (可上传附件)
信息提示
关闭
请填处理意见
关闭