| 查看: 1759 | 回复: 2 | |||
[交流]
论文被electrochemica Acta 拒搞，编辑建议修改重投，有戏吗？
|
|
On the whole, the recommendations could leave some chance for the paper to be prepared in a more acceptable form for publication, but it is however clear that the manuscript has to be substantially revised and improved, practically rewritten. In particular, the comments of Referee 1 are especially severe. Under similar circumstances, from an editorial point of view the manuscript can only be PROVISIONALLY REJECTED. This means that, if you wish, you may resubmit a new manuscript based on this work. It is up to you to judge whether you will be able to present convincing arguments to the referees, particularly to Referee 1. In resubmitting a new version, please be aware that the new manuscript has to go to the relevant reviewers for further perusal and should thus either conform to or adequately rebut their requests. In any case the new manuscript will receive a different registration number. In particular, I urge you to conform to the TECHNICAL EDITORIAL ISSUES as well as to the guidelines regarding HIGHLIGHTS. Reviewer #1: The revised manuscript does not address the main points of the review comments. To make my comments clear (….the influence of length and morphology on the photoactivity……)In the manuscript, the increase of photoconversion efficiency for the tubes from different electrolytes is associated to different reasons. In the present state the results are not really convincing to support the conclusions. Therefore I cannot recommend the manuscript to be published. 审稿人1第一次说我的文章没有新意，修改后回复如上，说文章分析不全面，和目前很多文章不太吻合之类，坚持cannot recommend the manuscript to be published。 Reviewer #2: The authors have adequately addressed the reviewers' concerns, especially those pertaining to the quality of the sample preparation. The revised manuscript has been improved and therefore, I recommend publication in Electrochimica Acta after a refinement of the English on the revised/new text. 审稿人2觉得修改的可以，推荐录用了~再改改语言 然后编辑给了rejected，这种情况修改重投希望大吗？或者直接换个影响因子低 一点的投？ |
回复此楼» 猜你喜欢
结合人工智能，周易传统文化，filecode打分制来了，3分以上希望很大。
已经有4人回复
-
2019年青年基金涵评意见，大家看看几个A，几个B?
已经有11人回复
-
重要来源：本周末出结果
已经有5人回复
-
FileCode能看出啥？
已经有23人回复
-
应该是93bebmhtak前后十一个字符比较关键
已经有36人回复
-
关于Filecode分析方法
已经有9人回复
-
不应该看fileCode
已经有6人回复
-
好奇怪的filecode
已经有6人回复
-
长年满屏的广告，版主太不责任了。基金也等的急
已经有4人回复
-
filecode
已经有15人回复
» 本主题相关价值贴推荐，对您同样有帮助:
- 投Energy &Fuels 编辑的拒信，大家看看还有戏吗？
已经有7人回复
- SCI退修重投，还有戏吗
已经有11人回复
- sci 被拒后，大修改后重投这个杂志有戏吗？
已经有35人回复
- 投 electrochemica acta 让大修
已经有3人回复
- 投稿到Elsevier杂志未过技术审查，修改后再投还有戏吗？
已经有15人回复
gufengzhang
银虫 (小有名气)
- 应助: 0 (幼儿园)
- 金币: 476.4
- 散金: 563
- 红花: 4
- 帖子: 290
- 在线: 323.8小时
- 虫号: 1894959
- 注册: 2012-07-16
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 光谱分析
2楼2014-07-14 22:37:16
wzhhust
木虫 (著名写手)
- 应助: 36 (小学生)
- 贵宾: 0.03
- 金币: 5556.8
- 散金: 1210
- 红花: 1
- 帖子: 1443
- 在线: 484.9小时
- 虫号: 635136
- 注册: 2008-10-24
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 无机非金属类光电信息与功
3楼2014-07-15 03:10:00
