24小时热门版块排行榜    

查看: 665  |  回复: 2
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

zhou2192

铁虫 (正式写手)

[交流] 请看看审稿人的意见,要不要改文章类型呢? 已有2人参与

最近向韩国化学投了篇文章,文章类型是“Article”,审稿人给了审稿意见,还加了句话,建议改为“Note”,到底要不要改呢?
审稿意见如下:The length of paper should be shortened.
English should be improved.
The figures or figure captions are inadequate.
As this report contains some interesting structural and physical properties of a Cd and mixed-ligands MOF, I would like to support the publication of this work. However, the manuscript looks more appropriated for Notes, not for Full Papers. Other comments:
1. Figure 1 is not necessary because it is redundant with Figure 2.
2. Figures 2, 3, and 4 can be combined into a new Figure 2; they may be represented as 2(a), 2(b), and 2(c).
3. Tables 1 and 2 may be moved to Supporting Information to save the space in the main text.
4. Some typo errors:
- gas absorption > gas adsorption
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:

已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

xiaofangNo.1

新虫 (初入文坛)


小木虫: 金币+0.5, 给个红包,谢谢回帖
这意见给得很详细具体,好改啊
3楼2013-07-16 15:54:41
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 3 个回答
普通表情 高级回复 (可上传附件)
信息提示
请填处理意见