| 查看: 2252 | 回复: 12 | ||||
[交流]
nanotechnology
|
|
07/02/2011 Manuscript for Board level decision In progress 31/01/2011 Original manuscript to referee Unable to report 31/01/2011 Original manuscript to referee Report received 11/01/2011 Original manuscript to referee In progress 11/01/2011 Original manuscript to referee Report received 11/01/2011 Original manuscript to referee Unable to report 15/12/2010 Original manuscript to referee Unable to report 15/12/2010 Original manuscript to referee Unable to report 13/12/2010 Original manuscript to referee Unable to report 01/12/2010 Original manuscript to referee Report received 29/11/2010 Original manuscript to referee Unable to report 29/11/2010 Original manuscript to referee Unable to report 29/11/2010 Original manuscript to referee Unable to report 请大家帮我分析一下状况 |
回复此楼» 收录本帖的淘帖专辑推荐
 decision in progress |
» 猜你喜欢
浙江师范大学是怎么坑我的
已经有7人回复
-
求教各位大神：2026教育部人文社科青年基金项目何时公示呀？
已经有6人回复
-
面上有专家说实验设备不是我们单位的
已经有8人回复
-
科研求助
已经有4人回复
-
博士去二本高校当辅导员，如何调整心态？
已经有11人回复
-
江苏省自然基金 什么时候出结果
已经有6人回复
-
闲聊
已经有3人回复
» 本主题相关价值贴推荐，对您同样有帮助:
- nanotechnology投稿
已经有15人回复
- 急求Nanotechnology投稿的模板
已经有6人回复
- nanotechnology期刊投稿
已经有10人回复
2楼2011-02-08 15:35:45
3楼2011-02-08 15:53:01
wulishi8
专家顾问 (知名作家)
-
专家经验: +373 - SEPI: 5
- 应助: 1195 (博后)
- 贵宾: 0.888
- 金币: 28974.7
- 帖子: 7711
- 在线: 1702.7小时
- 虫号: 654606
4楼2011-02-08 18:22:03
5楼2011-02-08 18:31:36
天道酬勤(金币+1): iop还是公正 2011-02-08 19:03:19
天道酬勤(金币+1): 2011-02-14 09:24:46
天道酬勤(金币+1): 2011-02-14 09:24:46
|
本帖内容被屏蔽 |
6楼2011-02-08 18:49:00
|
第一 The fabrication method discussed in this work is not original and the quality of the work does not meet the standard of Nanotechnology. 第二： The work is a continuation of previous studies of the same group。 The presented results are interesting and provide new concepts for the fabrication of nanostuctures in solution. Therefore I recommend publication of the manuscript in Nanotechnology. However, before publication the manuscript needs severe correction of the English language as well as of many typos. 第三： In conclusion, publication of this paper in Nanotechnology is recommended after a minor, compulsory revision. [ Last edited by 天道酬勤 on 2011-2-8 at 19:02 ] |
7楼2011-02-08 18:59:59
祝贺！ 8楼2011-02-08 19:17:43
9楼2011-02-09 07:36:57
10楼2011-02-09 08:09:57
11楼2011-02-09 08:46:57
12楼2011-02-09 08:53:37
|
Third referee's second report The paper was revised according to most of my previous comments. From the point of view of scientific contents, it deserves publication in Nanotechnology. However, the English must be carefully revised (as I asked in my previous report) because the text is plenty of mistakes. Many sentences have to be reformulated using a more correct English. A well written paper is always more pleasurable to read and has a higher impact. I think that a detailed correction of the text is beyond the assignments of the reviewer and the Authors should take care of this task |
13楼2011-03-03 21:16:01