| 查看: 6274 | 回复: 27 | |||
| 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 | |||
mlshmily木虫 (著名写手)
|
[交流]
Revise-大修还是小修？第二个审稿人什么意思？ 已有14人参与
|
||
|
收到Elsevier期刊的审稿意见：Revise。 但不知道大修还是小修，似乎是Elsevier的审稿意见模板。好像是修改重投，是新投稿吗？ 另外，第二个审稿人什么意思？有人说比较危险，他是拒审的意思，可能因为论文太差了。 还有戏吗？ 请明白人点拨一二。谢谢！ Dear XXXX, The reviewers have commented on your above paper. They indicated that it is not acceptable for publication in its present form. However, if you feel that you can suitably address the reviewers' comments (included below), the Editor In Chief invites you to revise and resubmit your manuscript. Please carefully address the issues raised in the comments. If you are submitting a revised manuscript, please also: a) outline each change made (point by point) as raised in the reviewer comments AND/OR b) provide a suitable rebuttal to each reviewer comment not addressed Yours sincerely, Reviewers' comments: Reviewer #1: I think this manuscript addressed an interesting and potentially promising topic. Also, it is obvious that the authors did an extensive search on the existing reports and research literature. However, I feel that this paper have some areas that need to be addressed. First, I disagree with the authors' organization of contents……... Second, ……. Third, the paper should shorten the section on ……. Fourth, …… Finally, the writing in some sections can be improved (e.g., the last paragraph in page 3). I hope the authors find the review helpful and wish them good luck with their research in this area. Reviewer #2: The work is interesting but I wasn't convinced that the discussion or conclusions achieved that much apart from saying the obvious. I did like the way the discussion drew down data from a number of sources thus providing an uninformed reader with a range of good background facts and figures. I would have preferred to see more ambition in the paper's aim. There are many minor errors - often the definite article is missed out, quite a number of spelling errors, some references are very old yet are used to support current understanding. These all need attention. I thought the sources of data were in need of more care. There are other sources that are probably better than some that are mentioned. |
回复此楼» 猜你喜欢
售SCI文章，我:8O5.5.1.O.54,科目齐全,可+急
已经有7人回复
-
现代”学阀”该如何界定
已经有3人回复
-
售SCI一区T0P文章，我:8.O55.1.O.54,科目全,可十急
已经有3人回复
-
国社科系统bug了，是不是要放榜了？
已经有9人回复
-
申博发邮件
已经有9人回复
-
各位大神，目前国内有哪些比较好用的逆合成软件？
已经有9人回复
-
上海工程技术大学激光智能制造课题组｜2027级博士研究生招生公告
已经有8人回复
-
上海工程技术大学激光智能制造课题组招收博士研究生
已经有8人回复
skyfishing
铁虫 (小有名气)
- 应助: 8 (幼儿园)
- 金币: 296.4
- 散金: 112
- 红花: 1
- 帖子: 70
- 在线: 51.7小时
- 虫号: 860836
- 注册: 2009-09-30
- 专业: 功能陶瓷
19楼2014-02-06 13:19:45
2楼2014-02-05 00:08:48
3楼2014-02-05 00:16:54
kingki
至尊木虫 (知名作家)
- 应助: 465 (硕士)
- 金币: 23654.3
- 散金: 6301
- 红花: 18
- 帖子: 7935
- 在线: 601.3小时
- 虫号: 514983
- 注册: 2008-02-29
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 电化学
4楼2014-02-05 00:22:54