[交流] Small28天出结果，贴出审稿评价大家来猜编辑（中国人）最终结果

EVALUATION:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Please rate the importance of this submission.

Reviewer #1: Should be published in this journal

Reviewer #2: Could be considered for a sister journal

--------------------

Please rate the originality of this submission.

Reviewer #1: Acceptable level of new results

Reviewer #2: Insufficient level of new results

--------------------

Please rate the scientific and technical content of this submission.

Reviewer #1: Minor inconsistencies or inaccuracies

Reviewer #2: Minor inconsistencies or inaccuracies

--------------------

Please rate the length of this submission.

Reviewer #1: Concise and correct length

Reviewer #2: Requires additional information

COMMENTS TO AUTHOR:

Reviewer #1: The manuscript by XXX et al. addresses the XXX. The paper is interesting and easy to read. Overall I like it. My only concern has to do with the efficiency of XXX process. The way the authors define it -XXX is misleading in my opinion, because it does not take into account that the XXX. Therefore I would not call this process highly efficient. E.g. XXX. The authors should fix this issue.

Reviewer #2: XXX is an interesting topic. The synthesis and coupling of XXX is not new and manipulation of such organic/inorganic hybrids is also not new. Authors can consult the recent review Functionalized polymer nanofibers: a versatile platform for manipulating light at the nanoscale by Pan Wang, Yipei Wang and Limin Tong in Light: Science and applications, 2013 for this topic.
Probably the only new aspect of this paper is the XXX, and this I would expect the authors would back their findings with some theoretical calculations of XXX. Therefore I think this manuscript is more suited to a more specialized journal.

--
Dr. Jipei Yuan

Small
E-mail: small@wiley-vch.de
Phone: +49 6201-606-500
Phone: +86 10-8418-7838
http://small-journal.de/

回复此楼

» 猜你喜欢

参与限项已经有3人回复
假如你的研究生提出不合理要求已经有7人回复
实验室接单子已经有4人回复
全日制（定向）博士已经有4人回复
对氯苯硼酸纯化已经有3人回复
求助:我三月中下旬出站，青基依托单位怎么办？已经有12人回复
不自信的我已经有12人回复
所感已经有4人回复
要不要辞职读博？已经有7人回复
北核录用已经有3人回复

» 本主题相关价值贴推荐，对您同样有帮助:

一审结束，编辑在信里只给了一个审稿人的意见，另一个说是见附件，但是找不到任何附件已经有50人回复
求助:decision letter 大修没有审稿附件，发邮件过去10天了，还没有回复.. 已经有9人回复
IEEE Transactions 论文 majore revision，审稿意见有点多，中的希望大不？有金币发呀已经有28人回复
被这样的审稿意见拒搞了。已经有23人回复
MATERIALS LETTERS 被拒后能否按照审稿人的意见修改后再次投稿？已经有25人回复
Small的communication已投稿20天,毫无消息,啥子情况? 已经有18人回复
论文中了要不要给编辑和审稿人去信致谢已经有17人回复
审稿3个月，审稿人的意见和编辑意见不同已经有52人回复
审稿意见如下所示，这是什么意思，希望大家指导一下，非常感谢已经有5人回复
关于审稿经历及经验的交流 ----- 希望对战友投稿有帮助已经有14人回复
SCI 审稿结果serious modification，怎么办？已经有36人回复
JBC审稿结束，希望各位高手帮忙看一下审稿意见，是否有必要修改后重新投稿？已经有6人回复
投了篇small，审稿意见如下，修改后重投有希望吗？已经有15人回复
这么个审稿意见，录用几率大吗？已经有20人回复
大修后被编辑拒掉，重投会换审稿人吗？已经有13人回复
有没有两个审稿人一个拒，一个大修，然后编辑reject但是可以resubmit 已经有16人回复
关于推荐审稿人已经有23人回复
谁见过这样的审稿意见？已经有34人回复

» 抢金币啦！回帖就可以得到:

查看全部散金贴

1楼 2015-05-05 16:38:01

已阅关注TA 给TA发消息送TA红花 TA的回帖

鲁史一条龙

银虫 (正式写手)

应助: 41 (小学生)
金币: 3923.6
帖子: 605
在线: 326.4小时
虫号: 1858297

引用回帖:

46楼: Originally posted by duxin_30 at 2015-05-07 17:22:31
正常编辑都应该是拒稿的节奏。第一个审稿人虽然同意接受但是给人感觉太随便了点。第二个审稿人说得头头是道，即使他可能是错的，也给人一种很了解此领域的感觉。所以编辑很可能会支持第二个审稿人。

分析很入理

回复此楼