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 » JACS被拒稿，大家看看argue有戏么
51/1返回列表
查看: 7113  |  回复: 30
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

elenlittle

金虫 (小有名气)

[交流] JACS被拒稿，大家看看argue有戏么

各位高人，小弟上月初投稿JACS，40天后收到拒信，杯具中。拒信如下：
Dear Dr. xxx:

Thank you for submitting your manuscript for publication in the Journal of the American Chemical Society.  Your Article has been examined by expert reviewers whose comments are attached.  You will conclude that the paper finds a somewhat mixed response. In view of this I had to build my own opinion and I must say that I concur with the criticism of the negative review regarding the practical device function. Also, the use of xxx has ample literature precedence. In brief, I felt that this work is better suited for a more specialized journal. Therefor I am unable to accept this manuscript for publication in JACS

We appreciate your choice of the Journal of the American Chemical Society as a possible forum for the presentation of your work.

Sincerely,

Klaus Muellen

******************************************
Prof. Dr. Klaus Muellen
Associate Editor, JACS
Max Planck Institute for Polymer Research Ackermannweg 10 PO Box 3148
D-55021 Mainz, GERMANY
Telephone: 801 585 6417
Fax: 202 513 8683 (EFAX)
E-Mail: muellen-office@jacs.acs.org
******************************************

------------------------------------

Reviewer(s)' Comments to Author:

Reviewer: 1

Recommendation: Publish in JACS after minor revisions.

Significance: High (suitable for JACS)

Novelty: High (suitable for JACS)

Broad interest: High (suitable for JACS)

Scholarly presentation: High (suitable for JACS)

Are the conclusions adequately supported by the data?: Yes

Are the literature references appropriate and correct?: Yes

Do the contents justify the length of this manuscript?: Yes

Reviewer: 2

Recommendation: Publish elsewhere.

Significance: Moderate (not suitable for JACS)

Novelty: High (suitable for JACS)

Broad interest: Moderate (not suitable for JACS)

Scholarly presentation: High (suitable for JACS)

Are the conclusions adequately supported by the data?: Yes

Are the literature references appropriate and correct?: Yes

Do the contents justify the length of this manuscript?: Yes

小老板建议发封信argue一下，在这同时可以准备改投其他杂志。大家给出出主意。
回复此楼

» 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 2012-12-12 09:37:54
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

不取俗名

木虫 (正式写手)
引用回帖:
7楼: Originally posted by yml11788 at 2012-12-12 10:07:05
重做修改，改投argue。

。。。什么鬼

[ 发自小木虫客户端 ]
回复此楼
27楼2015-06-06 08:34:00
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 31 个回答

shawxz2012

捐助贵宾 (文坛精英)
★
elenlittle(金币+1): 谢谢参与
副主编是Mullen啊，那估计够呛了
赞一下 回复此楼
3楼2012-12-12 09:53:55
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

googleuboy

木虫 (知名作家)
★
elenlittle(金币+1): 谢谢参与
从两个reviewer的评论来看， Significance: Moderate (not suitable for JACS) ，Novelty: High (suitable for JACS) 这两项都不错的，好好修改了投出去吧，还是很有希望的
赞一下(1人) 回复此楼
4楼2012-12-12 10:03:14
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

elenlittle

金虫 (小有名气)
引用回帖:
3楼: Originally posted by shawxz2012 at 2012-12-12 09:53:55
副主编是Mullen啊，那估计够呛了

是不是因为Mullen对中国人比较苛刻？我们第一作者单位在欧洲，通讯作者都是外国人，会不会好点？
赞一下 回复此楼
6楼2012-12-12 10:04:14
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 31 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