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 » 原创经验 » 比较奇怪的拒稿信，发出来给大家看看！
51/1返回列表
查看: 1876  |  回复: 5
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

dongyifeia

银虫 (初入文坛)

[交流] 比较奇怪的拒稿信，发出来给大家看看！ 已有5人参与

一篇自我感觉良好的文章发到CBP，Part C，1月27投稿，一直没收到任何邮件，昨天发信催稿，得到如下回复：
Dear Dr. X

Thanks for your letter. I've checked your file and you were sent a decision letter from the editor on February 18, 2014. I'm sorry if for some reason you did not receive this. I've copied it below for you.

Kind regards,
Marlene


From:Martin Grosell <cbpcmartin@gmail.com>
To:"Dong X" <X@163.com>
Cc:
Bcc:
Subject: Decision on CBP ms.23241

Dear Dr. X:

Thank you for submitting your manuscript “Disruption of the XXXX” for consideration for publication in CBP.

We regret to have to inform you that the editors, after consultation with members of the CBP Editorial Board and after contacting potential external reviewers, have decided not to pursue external review of your manuscript any further and to close the file.

Unfortunately, after contacting numerous experts in the field, there was not a single one willing to accept the referee assignment. We have taken these responses as a lack of enthusiasm for the fit of your paper to the readership of CBP. We carefully choose reviewers for their expertise and their interests and involvement in comparative fields. The reviewers’ disappointing lack of interest in your manuscript is a reasonable indication that you would be missing the intended target audience by pursuing publication of this particular study in CBP.

Finally, please note that CBP receives many more high quality submissions than we could possibly handle (or publish) and therefore, we have to take a relatively hard line on manuscripts that are deemed of peripheral interest to our readership or represent an incremental advance in knowledge only, at least within a comparative framework. Our decision does neither reflect on the quality of the research reported, nor on the quality of the issues addressed.

We regret to have to convey this disappointing message, but we are positive that you will find a more appreciative reviewing climate and readership in a more specialist journal.

Thank you for considering CBP.

Best wishes,

Dr. Tom Mommsen & Dr. Pat J. Walsh
Editors-in-Chief
Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology

我个人感觉这意思就是文章水平不咋地，我们没兴趣，不想浪费时间，各位虫友觉得呢？
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:
1楼 2014-04-24 08:45:22
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

晔?�

银虫 (小有名气)
★
小木虫: 金币+0.5, 给个红包，谢谢回帖
楼主，我投了这个杂志的partD，但是一直没有消息，怎么找到主编邮箱？
赞一下 回复此楼
6楼2017-09-13 11:13:05
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 6 个回答

一字

木虫 (正式写手)

寻找阳光
★
小木虫: 金币+0.5, 给个红包，谢谢回帖
字面上是你说的意思，研究内容提不起审稿人兴趣，直接被拒

[ 发自手机版 http://muchong.com/3g ]
赞一下 回复此楼
载不动许多愁！
2楼2014-04-24 08:49:53
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

F_Shaw

捐助贵宾 (著名写手)
★
小木虫: 金币+0.5, 给个红包，谢谢回帖
你的文章没人愿意审，因此编辑认为你的文章不能引起该期刊读者的兴趣，但编辑也指出并不是因为文章质量的问题。
简单地说，就是你文章内容不对该期刊的口味。
果断改投吧！
赞一下(1人) 回复此楼
Paper,paper,paper!
3楼2014-04-24 08:53:42
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

Q_LI乔

木虫 (小有名气)
★
小木虫: 金币+0.5, 给个红包，谢谢回帖
果断改投， 编辑认为你的文章不能吸引他们期刊的读者，就是不适合该期刊
赞一下 回复此楼
4楼2014-04-24 10:28:35
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 6 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