24小时热门版块排行榜    

查看: 2395  |  回复: 56
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

vinick

金虫 (正式写手)


[交流] RSC Advance 大修,看有机会么?

小弟手上的论文从JPCC,到ACS,再到PCCP最终转投到RSC Advance,前几个都是已不符合刊物主旨秒拒,RSC经转投整整两个月给了修改意见,大修,但是两个审稿人给的意见都很笼统,觉得很棘手,请各位大侠开下,希望大不!

Reviewer(s)' Comments to Author:
Referee: 1

Comments to the Author
Overall, XXXX is a very common topic:
(1) Fig. 1 and Fig. 2 are not necessary, there are general concepts,
(2) Actually, the insertion method herein shows no obvious advantages over the reported, and the authors ignored the important references,
(3) Secondly, the manuscript also shows no novelty in the aspects of chemical sciences,
(4) The English of the manuscript should be refined.

Referee: 2

Comments to the Author
1. Please check the manuscript and refine the language carefully. There are a number of grammatical errors and instances of badly worded/constructed sentences. (Such as Page 1 Lines 6, 13, 17, 20, and so on)
2. Please provide some details in the "Experimental section", such as: what is the structural formulas and the chemical composition of XXXXX?
3. Several important contributions, such as the work of Wenchang Yan (2012, 2013), should be mentioned.
4. Please provide more evidences for the existence of isatin in the interlayer space or the channels of XXXXXXX. I believe dissolution test should be performed for further estimation. Moreover, clear morphological and porous characters for XXXXXXX and its composition should be provided, such as the SEM results.
5. Conclusions should be re-organized for the clear and concise purpose.
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

已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

bushiniuren

银虫 (正式写手)



vinick(金币+1): 谢谢参与
感觉还是新颖性遭到质疑吧。楼主应该仔细看看审稿人提出的那几篇文献,找找和自己文章的不同之处,以及优于其他文献的一些特点。另外,找一个专业英语好点的帮忙看看语法错误,个人觉得不必要
用多长的句子,只要把自己的东西讲明白就行了。
3楼2014-08-28 14:28:47
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 57 个回答
简单回复
yuguiyan4楼
2014-08-28 14:34   回复  
vinick(金币+1): 谢谢参与
[ 发自小木虫客户端 ]
zhuyaneres13楼
2014-08-28 14:50   回复  
vinick(金币+1): 谢谢参与
支持
普通表情 高级回复 (可上传附件)
信息提示
请填处理意见