| 查看: 1756 | 回复: 8 | |||
| 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 | |||
subrinna84金虫 (小有名气)
|
[求助]
修改稿的修改量很大怎么给注释
|
||
|
稿子一审回来了,结果不是很好,一个审稿人说论文应该改写为小论文,其它说的不多,并在文中给了少量语句修改注释;另一个审稿人提了很多意见,列出了一些主要的修改方向,并且重之又重的是,这个审稿人在稿子中(PDF)添加了很多需要修改的注释,包括对许多句子出现的含义不清、表达意思的质疑等等。 最终编辑也建议我改写为小论文。 问题:因为我投稿的篇幅很长,图很多,如果改成小论文的话,需要精简很多东西,还可能改写很多内容。这样的话,我提交修改稿时,怎么说明我修改的地方呢,如果一个个标示出来,那几乎不可能,而且对照改前与改后修改的地方估计也比较困难。如果采用word修订格式的话,稿子江山一片红,估计审稿人也难找到当初自己划线注释的地方。我该怎么办?过来人帮助一下吧 |
» 收录本帖的淘帖专辑推荐
yundepan |
» 猜你喜欢
论文终于录用啦!满足毕业条件了
已经有17人回复
不自信的我
已经有5人回复
磺酰氟产物,毕不了业了!
已经有4人回复
投稿Elsevier的杂志(返修),总是在选择OA和subscription界面被踢皮球
已经有8人回复
» 本主题相关价值贴推荐,对您同样有帮助:
论文修改稿中修改部分怎么标记
已经有3人回复
修改稿改动比较大,如何说明文中修改的部分!
已经有5人回复
excel中做的图怎么转换为eps或postscript格式(期刊修改稿要求)
已经有8人回复
怎么解释 Pt/TiO2催化制氢后,表面价态改变?
已经有11人回复
大家提交国际期刊修改稿的时候,是怎么表示出那部分是修改过的。。。
已经有8人回复
修改稿该怎么标注呢?
已经有5人回复
JPCB提交修改稿后迟迟不接收,怎么回事呢?
已经有11人回复
大修文章提交的修改稿需要对原稿进行标注吗?
已经有4人回复
Elsevier投修改稿,修改的地方需要标注吗?
已经有11人回复
修改稿返回了十天还没反应,改怎么办?
已经有51人回复
怎样修改、注解PDF
已经有10人回复
求助修改稿的cover letter怎么写?
已经有13人回复
subrinna84
金虫 (小有名气)
- 应助: 0 (幼儿园)
- 金币: 406.7
- 散金: 550
- 红花: 1
- 帖子: 283
- 在线: 109.6小时
- 虫号: 1044084
- 注册: 2010-06-19
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 工程热物理相关交叉领域
|
这个是编辑的意见: As you will notice both the reviewers are rather concerned with the quality of your paper. Although they recognise the useful content in terms of the data provided, they point out that you are not giving any explanation of the mechanisms occurring in the mine. Probably some (back)analysis of the toppling mechanism would add value to the contribution. My recommendation, if you are not providing such an explanation, is that you shorten the paper significantly and focus on monitoring and the results, and resubmit is as a technical note. Please follow the guidelines for submission of technical notes (no abstract, limited number of pages, limited number of figures, etc.). |
4楼2011-10-09 08:40:18
subrinna84
金虫 (小有名气)
- 应助: 0 (幼儿园)
- 金币: 406.7
- 散金: 550
- 红花: 1
- 帖子: 283
- 在线: 109.6小时
- 虫号: 1044084
- 注册: 2010-06-19
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 工程热物理相关交叉领域
|
Reviewer #1: The project definitely is interesting, and the observation results for sure are valuable. What I am missing is a real technical approach to the explanation of the mechanisms occurring in the mine. Probably some (back)analysis of the toppling mechanism would add value to the contribution. The paper is quite long for the contents it offers. I would recommend to shorten it significantly and focus on monitoring and the results and resubmit is as a technical note. Some comments and corrections have been inserted in the document. |
5楼2011-10-09 08:41:36
subrinna84
金虫 (小有名气)
- 应助: 0 (幼儿园)
- 金币: 406.7
- 散金: 550
- 红花: 1
- 帖子: 283
- 在线: 109.6小时
- 虫号: 1044084
- 注册: 2010-06-19
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 工程热物理相关交叉领域
|
Reviewer #2: The manuscript could be of interest for the Journal but requires major changes that will improve the quality and the organization of the paper. A major revision of the English language is needed. An annotated PDF with punctual technical and major language corrections is attached. Below are given some main recommendations that I suggest, in addition to comments put directly in the PDF document. |
6楼2011-10-09 08:42:14







回复此楼