过卡 2023-06-12

Just make the modifications according to the suggestions provided. The deadline can be seen in the submission system, it is not mentioned in the email.

临时演员 2023-06-12

Brother, can we discuss the suggestion of "accept with minor revision"? Currently, I am in this situation where the reviewer's suggestion is to reference the latest literature and there are no other comments. The editor has also not provided a deadline for revisions.

过卡 2023-06-12

after the editor, there is a formal manuscript number

讨厌等待 2023-06-12

2023.2.2 submit manuscript
2023.3.6 under review
2023.4.9 under review
2023.4.11 required review complete
2023.5.29 required review complete
2023.6.1 Decision in Process
2023.6.12 rejected
Garbage speed, submitted the manuscript for 4 and a half months and it was rejected after the first review (three reviewers, the first reviewer didn't take it seriously and rejected it without reason, the other two reviewers made revisions).
I won't touch this garbage journal again.

睿智先生 2023-06-09

Hello, when was the manuscript number generated? Was it created as soon as it was submitted?

睿智先生 2023-06-09

Hello, does this journal generate a manuscript number once the submission is completed? I haven't received a manuscript number yet and I'm not sure why.

睿智先生 2023-06-09

Hello, the submission status is "submitted to Journal", but there is no manuscript number. What's the situation? Do you get a manuscript number immediately after submitting it?

CAT 2023-06-07

6.7 under review, it seems like the editor forgot about my article... or maybe I had to remind them twice.

过卡 2023-06-07

2023/03/17 submit
2023/04/12 revise
2023/04/29 revision submit
2023/05/21 accept with minor revision
2023/06/02 revision submit
2023/06/06 accept

2023/03/17 submit
2023/04/12 revise
2023/04/29 revision submit
2023/05/21 accept with minor revision
2023/06/02 revision submit
2023/06/06 accept

Jack07 2023-05-31

3.22 Submission;
4.29 Major revisions were made and sent back. Four reviewers (three agreed, one refused, so the editor requested major revisions);
5.24 Accepted.
The second JMP article, both the editor's handling speed and the review speed were very fast.

changgen 2023-05-23

2.21 Submission
3.22 Two reviewers, one major revision and one minor revision
3.24 Revised
4.24 Second reviewer reissues comments, replied to each comment one by one
4.25 Reviewer 2 directly replies "none" and rejects the submission
5.23 Rejection by the editor

Overall, I believe that Reviewer 2's rejection without giving clear reasons is very irresponsible. I also do not fully agree with Editor Kapoor's decision to reject me without providing clear reasons.

讨厌等待 2023-05-22

It's really too slow. It's been almost 4 months and there hasn't been any feedback from the first review. This journal is really not worth submitting to anymore. Whether good or bad, at least have the decency to give a response. I don't care anymore if it gets accepted or not. Even waiting for one more second is disgusting! Irresponsible editors!

讨厌等待 2023-05-16

Still no progress.

J-success 2023-05-16

I have been in this state for a long time too. How about you, my friend?

.Clover 2023-05-16

20230224 submit
20230310 request for reduction
20230502 accept
No further comments were given in between, directly hired.

不知道该叫什么 2023-05-15

What's up now, brother?

CAT 2023-05-09

5.9 is still with the editor, it's a bit slow.

讨厌等待 2023-05-08

"Required Reviews Completed" has been in this state for a month, have any friends experienced a similar situation?

CAT 2023-05-04

2023.4.30 Submitted
2023.5.1 With editor
Wishing good luck

yiyi-zhou 2023-04-26

A very good journal, with two reviewers. The first reviewer completed the review in half a month, while the second reviewer did not agree to review for seven months. After seven and a half months, the first reminder letter was sent. A new reviewer was then found, and the review was completed in eight months, with 20 days given for revisions. Turning machining.

认真脸 2023-04-25

2023.2.3 submitted
2023.2.7 with editor
2023.2.21 under review
2023.3.18 revise (two reviewers, one provided five comments, the other accepted directly)
2023.3.23 submit revision
2023.3.24 under review
2023.4.25 accepted

逍遥丿旭 2023-04-19

My condition has been like this for a long time too. May I ask what the final result is?

lipoooo 2023-04-18

May I ask what direction the chief editor is in?

lipoooo 2023-04-18

May I ask if your article has been assigned to the chief editor?

0砂吃鸡 2023-04-17

2022 12 28 submitted to journal
2022 12 28 with editor
2022 12 28 under review
2023 02 03 required reviews completed
2023 02 07 revise
2023 02 20 revised submitted
2023 02 24 under review
2023 03 10 required reviews completed
2023 03 18 accept
The efficiency is acceptable, and the speed is acceptable. Wishing for an early breakthrough.

cg_hero 2023-04-12

We have been searching for a reviewer for three months but still haven't found one.

小博2005 2023-03-30

In the past two months, the editor only selected a reviewer once, but no one accepted the review. The editor did not choose a reviewer again. Luckily, another editor noticed and returned it to us, saying that there were not enough reviewers and rejected it.

走走6 2023-03-29

Mine is the same, after two months the second person accepted the manuscript for review, and then three months passed, indicating that one person has already completed the review. It's too slow. It didn't used to be like this.

小博2005 2023-03-28

The editor is not dedicated at all.
It took 15 days for the editor to handle it, and then 2+ reviewers were selected. After 37 days, no one accepted the review, and the editor did not choose new reviewers either, leaving it unattended.

走走6 2023-03-23

This fast decision basically means rejection.