拒稿信汇总

【求助】plosone拒稿信，帮忙看看怎么办，谢谢straybird179只看楼主各位大侠，小妹第一次投稿plosone，等了一个月后，被拒，拒稿信大致内容如下：First,amajorityofthefiguresarenotexperimentalinnature......Second,theideathatatentativeconclusionismadeisnotrigorous.Third,theideathat.......isnotrigorouslytestedanddoesnotappearsupportedbythedata.请教各位是不是说明我的论文结构有问题还是我的实验设计有问题？要怎么修改？各位战友：今天收到medicalhypotheses的拒稿信，但是内容奇怪，我是10月12投的，13编号，昨天DECISIONINPROGRESS今天就被拒绝很是郁闷请问大家也收到过类似的回信吗，请各位战友解读一下，本人还想继续投，有点不爽。附信如下：ThankyouforsubmittingyourpapertoMedicalHypotheses.Ihavenowreadthemanuscript...Unfortunately,itisouropinionthatyourmanuscriptdoesnotappeartobeastrongcandidateforconsiderationinMedicalHypothesesandwouldbeasappropriatelypublishedinanotherjournal.Thankyouforgivingustheopportunitytoconsideryourwork.YourssincerelyDr.M.MankuPhDEditorinChiefMedicalHypotheses各位前辈，由于急于毕业，文章投BBRC，5天后状态是completelyreject，拒稿理由很多且没有一句正面肯定的评论，而拒稿信中又说可以重投，我不理解既然我的文章一无是处，为什么还建议重投呢？不知是不是我理解错了？另外5天（包括周六、周日）就被拒了，是不是编辑给拒的，没有任何专家审过呢？我该怎么办呢？在线等待您的解答...(附部分拒稿信)Afteracarefulreviewofyourmanuscript,IamafraidthatwearenotabletoacceptitforpublicationinBBRCinitscurrentform.Asyouknow,thisisarapidcommunicationjournalandnotallsubmissions,regardlessoftheirmerit,aresuitableforthisformat.Ourstandardsareincreasinglyhigh,andinfact,approximately80%ofsubmissionsdonotmeetourcriteria...........Istronglyencourageyoutosignificantlyreviseyourmanuscriptbasedontheabovecommentary.Theconcernsofthereviewershouldbeaddressedpoint-by-pointinthecoverletterandchangesinthemanuscriptmustbeidentifiedbypageandparagraph,andnotedbyunderliningoritalicsinthetext.Pleasesubmityourmanuscriptasanewsubmissionandnotethatitwillbeassignedtothesameeditor.各位战友：今天收到medicalhypotheses的拒稿信，但是内容奇怪，我是10月12投的，13编号，昨天DECISIONINPROGRESS今天就被拒绝很是郁闷请问大家也收到过类似的回信吗，请各位战友解读一下，本人还想继续投，有点不爽。附信如下：ThankyouforsubmittingyourpapertoMedicalHypotheses.Ihavenowreadthemanuscript...Unfortunately,itisouropinionthatyourmanuscriptdoesnotappeartobeastrongcandidateforconsiderationinMedicalHypothesesandwouldbeasappropriatelypublishedinanotherjournal.Thankyouforgivingustheopportunitytoconsideryourwork.YourssincerelyDr.M.MankuPhDEditorinChiefMedicalHypothesesSC19:36:35请问各位前辈我的文章被拒了，拒稿信如下：IhavereadoveryourpaperandbelieveitisofpotentialinteresttoreadersofClinicalBiochemistry.HoweverIbelievethatgiventhefocusednatureyourworkthatthebestformatwouldbeasaBriefReport(ShortCommunication)ratherthanasafullpaper.Ifyouwishtosubmitpleasereformatyourpaperaccordingtothejournal'sGuideforAuthorsasashortcommunication.Pleasenotethatresubmissiondoesnotguaranteeacceptanceforpublication.ThankyouforyourinterestinClinicalBiochemistry.这样的BriefReport和一般的文章有什么差别？我还有必要把它改成BriefReport再投吗，还是改投别的杂志？谢谢了最近老收到拒稿信,有点伤感.DearDr.*ThankyouforsubmittingyourmanuscripttoLungCancer.Weregrettoadvisethataftercarefulconsiderationofyourpaperandseveralunsucessfulattemptsforexternalreview,wehavedecidednottopublishyourcontributioninthejournal.Wereceiveconsiderablymoremanuscriptsthanwehaveroomtopublish,socompetitionforspaceinthejournalisintense.Althoughyourcontributionwasnotsuccessfulonthisoccasion,wehopethatyouwillnotbeputofffromconsideringLungCancerforfuturesubmissions.YourssincerelyRolfStahelEditor-in-ChiefLungCancer投稿三个半月，只等到一封拒稿信，我能去信要审稿人的评论么？不甘心呀！外文审稿不是应该都给作者审稿人的评论吗？DearDr.x,Thankyouforsubmittingyourmanuscripttoxxx.Themanuscripthasbeenthroughourreviewprocess.Unfortunately,yourpapercannotbeassignedsufficientprioritytoallowpublication.Thecontentofthepapersubmitteddoesnotrepresentafocusareaforthisjournal.ThemanuscriptwouldinouropinionbebetterdirectedtoajournalotherthanDRCP.Iamsorrytodisappointyouonthisoccasion.Thankyouforallowingustheopportunitytoconsideryourpaperandweverymuchhopetoreceivefurthermanuscriptsfromyourgroupinfuture.Yourssincerely,xxxxxxxxxxxSC19:38:38DearDr.Hu:Iwriteyouinregardstomanuscript#09-09-0539entitled##whichyousubmittedtoClinicalPharmacologyandTherapeutics.Iregretthat,inviewoftheassessmentofthereviewerfoundatthebottomofthisletter,yourmanuscripthasnotbeenselectedforpublicationinClinicalPharmacologyandTherapeutics.Thejournalreceivesmanymorehigh-qualitysubmissionsthatitcanpublishandourEditorialTeam,inthecontextofthereviewercomments,mustidentifythemostimpactfulmanuscriptsforthelimitedpublicationspaceavailable.ThankyouforconsideringClinicalPharmacologyandTherapeuticsforthepublicationofyourresearch.Ihopetheoutcomeofthisspecificsubmissionwillnotdiscourageyoufromthesubmissionoffuturemanuscripts,andwewishyousuccessinachievingpublicationofthismanuscriptelsewhere.Sincerely,ScottA.WaldmanEditorinChief,[e-mail]'CommentstoAuthor:Reviewer:1CommentstotheAuthorThismeta-analysisaddressesanimportantclinicalquestionabout####indrugmetabolismbyCYP450.Themethodologyusedtoconducttheanalysisappearstobeappropriate.Themanuscriptcouldbeimprovedbyaddressingthelimitationsoftheanalysisinthediscussionsectionandexpressingthefindingsoftheanalysismoreconcisely.Anassessmentofthequalityoftheindividualstudieswouldalsobehelpfulininterpretingthefindingsofthemetaanalysis.Reviewer:2CommentstotheAuthorThemanuscriptbyH