Join the Reviewer Roulette Hub
Share your experience with a Peer Review Champion or Peer Review Antagonist. Select the category that best describes your experience, and then provide the quote, context, and the journal you submitted to. Please refrain from publishing any personal information, including names or email addresses.
Peer Review Antagonist Mean-spirited
This paper, although is well written, does not contain any physics, and therefore, is not suitable for publication in PRE. Moreover, from communicatio...
- Comment from Physical Review E reviewer
Peer Review Antagonist Mean-spirited
The quality of the writing is very poor, barely at the level of a student term paper at a decent university. The authors must learn to write in Stand...
- Comment from Sadhana reviewer
Peer Review Antagonist Mean-spirited
The comments of the Editor-in-Chief about your paper were: This paper does not meet the scientific level required by this journal.
- Comment from Cement and Concrete Research reviewer
Peer Review Antagonist Mean-spirited
For improvement of the introduction and characterization part, related references could be cited: • Journal of Materials Science and Technology. 2016;...
- Comment from Composite Part B reviewer
Peer Review Antagonist Mean-spirited
Although this study is considered a pilot trial, the small number of patients 12 divided into 4 groups is a serious flaw in methodology. The interpret...
- Comment from F1000 Research reviewer
Peer Review Antagonist Mean-spirited
The authors provide absolutely no information of how the samples were collected and how the DNA was prepared. Given that the authors in their gap anal...
- Comment from F1000 Research reviewer