| 查看: 4544 | 回复: 19 | |||
| 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 | |||
[求助]
Reject to Resubmit 已有11人参与
|
|||
| 我想问一下 年前的时候投了一篇文章到IOP nanotechnology里，今天给的回审意见是Reject to Resubmit 这是什么意思 是说已经被拒了么？这种情况下我是应该按着回审意见修改完之后再投回去好一些还是说我转投其它的杂志好一些？再投回去的话中的几率大么 |
回复此楼» 猜你喜欢
售SCI一区T0P文章，我:8O.55.1.O.5.4,科目齐全,可+急
已经有4人回复
-
有没有仍没收到信息的
已经有6人回复
-
售SCI文章，我:8O5.5.1.O.54,科目齐全,可+急
已经有4人回复
-
售SCI文章，我:8O.5.5.1O.54,科目全,可十急
已经有7人回复
-
售SCI文章，我:8O.5.5.1O.54,科目全,可十急
已经有6人回复
-
售SCI一区T0P文章，我:8.O.55.1.O54,科目全,可伽急
已经有8人回复
-
面上意见出来了
已经有12人回复
-
为什么到现在没收到通知？
已经有4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10人回复
-
导师吐槽：我怎么摊上了这么个极品研究生！
已经有9人回复
» 本主题相关价值贴推荐，对您同样有帮助:
- Reject & Resubmit，审稿意见有些“不靠谱”，怎么办呢？
已经有12人回复
- 求助，投到IEEE GRSL的文章被Reject and Resubmit
已经有29人回复
- reject & resubmit
已经有42人回复
- IEEE Trans. 状态为Reject with major revision and encouragement to resubmit
已经有14人回复
- resubmit是不是相当于重新投稿呢？
已经有24人回复
- JMCA reject&resubmit是不是没啥希望了
已经有10人回复
- Reject & Resubmit 大家看一下重投有机会吗
已经有4人回复
- 求助reject还是resubmit
已经有18人回复
- Taylor & Francis 的 Reject & Resubmit，请大家看看怎么办
已经有17人回复
- reject and resubmit
已经有12人回复
- RSC杂志Reject & Resubmit 大家看看重投希望大不
已经有14人回复
- 关于reject and resubmit 的问题
已经有14人回复
- MMOR reject and resubmit
已经有15人回复
- Reject & Resubmit
已经有18人回复
- 文章刚被判刑为reject&resubmit，请问一般多少天必须提交修改稿？
已经有5人回复
- reject and resubmit
已经有8人回复
frost_plx: 回帖置顶 2015-03-31 13:47:49
|
Your Paper, submitted to Nanotechnology, has now been refereed and the referee report(s) can be found below and/or attached to this message. We regret to inform you that your Paper is not suitable for publication in Nanotechnology in its current form. The changes requested by the referees are substantial and are too significant to warrant a revision of the article in its current form. However, the referee(s) feel that if you rewrite the article as explained in the referee reports, including any further work recommended, it may then be suitable for reconsideration. If you wish to rewrite your Paper, please take the referee comments fully into account and provide point-by-point responses with a full list of changes. We will treat the rewritten article as a new submission with a new article reference number and it will be peer reviewed again. Although we will go back to the previous referees for their opinion where possible, we may also contact further referees in order to ensure that the rewritten article meets our high quality and interest criteria. If it does not, the new version of the manuscript will be rejected. You can resubmit your revised manuscript here: https://mc04.manuscriptcentral.c ... babb2e4d32fd23c86eb We would like to thank you for your interest in Nanotechnology. Yours sincerely Referee: 1, Editorial Board Member COMMENTS TO THE AUTHOR(S) Send for review. Referee: 2 COMMENTS TO THE AUTHOR(S) The english is not readable and full of mistakes. The abbreviations used are missleading, e.g. TGA and HPLC. What means "sulfydryl" ? The methods used are not well described. What is a colloid particle technique? Maybe the authors used dynamic light scattering, but nothing is said in the methodic part. The hydrodynamic size can not be seen in TEM !. Monodisperse particle dispersions has to be calculated from a histogram of about 500 particles or more. In one word this manuscript is not acceptable and has to be rejected. Referee: 3 COMMENTS TO THE AUTHOR(S) • 1), It is very difficult to read and understand the manuscript due to the too many errors or improper expression of English. The English writing of manuscript should be carefully shecked and revised by the author. • 2), In the manuscript, the experiment data of TEM morphology, HRTEM, and EDS are not enough to determine that all synthesized particles with different stabilizers are *** compound. It's not proper to assign all * signals in EDS to the samples, which should come from both samples and the ****** in TEM. More experiment data are required to determine the crystal structure and composition of synthesized particles, such as XRD or electron diffraction pattern. • 3), The comparisons between the samples with stabilizers and one sample without any stabilizer are strongly recommended in order to exploring the influence of stabilizers on the microstructure of synthesized particles. 主要还是写的语法有问题 审稿人两个都说看不太懂 第三个给的意见很专业 如果我按第三个审稿人的意见好好修改的话 再投回去中的可能性大么？第二位审稿人说的很坚决，必须拒稿。 |
7楼2015-03-31 09:31:22
laoda_123456
木虫 (正式写手)
- 应助: 82 (初中生)
- 金币: 5801.7
- 红花: 9
- 帖子: 332
- 在线: 1053小时
- 虫号: 1267661
- 注册: 2011-04-16
- 专业: 动力学与控制
2楼2015-03-30 21:53:01
pingcne
木虫 (正式写手)
- 应助: 29 (小学生)
- 金币: 2295.2
- 散金: 10
- 红花: 6
- 帖子: 706
- 在线: 637.4小时
- 虫号: 616640
- 注册: 2008-10-04
- 专业: 光子与光电子器件
3楼2015-03-30 21:57:37
tongji_fubo
铁杆木虫 (著名写手)
- 应助: 91 (初中生)
- 金币: 17843.2
- 红花: 5
- 帖子: 2446
- 在线: 284.7小时
- 虫号: 1614185
- 注册: 2012-02-13
- 专业: 结构工程
4楼2015-03-30 22:01:02
30