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 » 交流 » chem comm投稿11天后，直接被编辑拒掉了。只好年后再战了。
31/1返回列表
查看: 4207  |  回复: 58
查看全部回帖 @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

smallfolk

金虫 (正式写手)

[交流] chem comm投稿11天后，直接被编辑拒掉了。只好年后再战了。

Thank you for your submission to ChemComm, which I have read with interest. I regret to inform you however that this manuscript will not be considered further as a submission to the journal. All manuscripts submitted to ChemComm are initially evaluated by the Editors to ensure they meet the essential criteria for publication in the journal. I’m sorry to say that on this occasion your article will undergo no further processing because it is not of sufficient urgency and impact to appeal to our wide readership.

Papers published in ChemComm should report preliminary accounts of original and significant research that will appeal to a wide general readership or be of great interest to the specialist. The rejection rate for papers submitted to ChemComm is ~70%. Further information regarding our policy on the initial assessment of submissions can be found on our website at http://www.rsc.org/Publishing/Jo ... ssessment/index.asp
对照了一下，
A manuscript may be returned to the author(s) without external review if, in the opinion of the Editor, the manuscript falls into one or more of the following categories:

•the manuscript clearly falls outside the scope of the journal;
•the work is of poor scientific quality such that it is clearly not suitable for publication in a top-tier scientific journal;
•the manuscript is of insufficient general interest for the journal and would be better suited to a more specialised journal;
•the novelty of the work falls below that required for the journal;
•the manuscript represents undue fragmentation of the research into multiple papers;
•the manuscript contains redundant information or significant amounts of material that has already been published elsewhere or is under consideration by another journal;
•the quality of the English in the manuscript is so poor as to render the science presented unclear;
•the manuscript has already been reviewed and rejected by a different RSC journal, and the author(s) have made little or no attempt to address the advice of the Editor and/or referees already given;
•the conclusions drawn by the manuscript are well known or have been previously published.   

貌似是编辑觉得应该投更专业的期刊。
不过我有个疑问，会不会因为不好意思直说写的太烂，而委婉地以文中所说的原因拒掉啊？
如之奈何？换个专业期刊试试？求意见！
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 2014-01-29 22:10:03
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

smallfolk

金虫 (正式写手)
引用回帖:
38楼: Originally posted by 绍敏郡主 at 2014-01-29 23:38:28
论文创新性如何？
如果你创新性确实还不错的话，那可能是你的cover letter写的不够好。
cover letter最重要的作用就是让编辑看到你论文的创新性和重要性，说服编辑送审。

自己觉得创新性还挺好的。所以审稿人都建议的是业内的大牛。但都是自认为，不过被编辑干掉有些不爽。introduction是收着在写，当时就担心这一点，cover letter写的有些略保守，没有说出拔高工作的意义。看来大概率是没引起编辑的兴趣。只好换个专业期刊试试了。祝新年快乐。

[ 发自手机版 http://muchong.com/3g ]
赞一下 回复此楼
50楼2014-01-30 05:30:54
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖
相关版块跳转 我要订阅楼主 smallfolk 的主题更新
31/1返回列表
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