菜直 2023-08-09

Why is it still "with editor" even though it's already the 9th?

菜直 2023-08-04

8.4 avec l'éditeur translates to "8.4 with the editor" in English.

菜直 2023-08-04

Take note, 8.3 submitted to journal.

ytuy 2023-02-09

2023.1.2 - Submitted to journal
2023.1.21 - Review
2023.2.27 - Review submitted to journal
2023.2.6 - Review
2023.2.7 - Review submitted to journal
2023.2.8 - Accept

aaaaaaaallllll 2023-01-21

Hello, do I need to write Research Elements for this journal? Do I need to provide original data in it?

aaaaaaaallllll 2023-01-21

Hello, may I ask if it is necessary to include Research Elements in this journal? Do I need to provide original data in it?

zeolite 2022-12-22

First article MMM, accepted for a month.
Second article MMM, took nearly three months in total, and the reviewers were also very careful. Although it is a primary subject journal, it is highly regarded. From previous zeolite to the current MMM, the quality of the articles has always been very good. The low impact factor is because it is a journal within the field, not a comprehensive journal. Of course, the number of citations cannot be compared to areas like electrochemistry. Keep the support going!
Most of the submissions to this journal are from peers working on zeolite and MOF. Welcome to communicate more.

taohaiyang 2022-11-19

The following text translates to English as:

submitted to journal 2022.8.17
with editor 2022.8.21
under review 2022.8.22
revisions 2022.9.14
revisions submitted to journal 2022.9.20
with editor 2022.9.21
under review 2022.10.23
required reviews completed 2022.10.24
accept 2022.11.8

~岁月静好 2022-07-19

Submitted to Journal 2022.6.20
With Editor 2022.6.21
Under Review 2022.6.22
Revisions 2022.6.30
Revisions Submitted to Journal 2022.7.12
With Editor 2022.7.13
Under Review 2022.7.13
Required Reviews Completed 2022.7.18
Accept 2022.7.18
Editor Steven Suib

Translation:
Submitted to Journal on June 20th, 2022
With Editor on June 21st, 2022
Under Review on June 22nd, 2022
Revisions on June 30th, 2022
Revisions Submitted to Journal on July 12th, 2022
With Editor on July 13th, 2022
Under Review on July 13th, 2022
Required Reviews Completed on July 18th, 2022
Accepted on July 18th, 2022
Editor: Steven Suib

徐然 2022-05-13

First submission, may I ask if when submitting to 3M, should the charts be listed at the end and deleted from the article? Or should they be separately listed at the end?

咿呀咿呀白 2022-03-09

Submission 21 Sep 2021
Revision 23 Feb 2022
Acceptance 6 Mar 2022
I procrastinated during the revision period, but the reviewers were very nice and the editor-in-chief was also very good~

猪猪侠6.0 2022-02-11

Posted on November 23rd.
Reviewed on December 6th.
Accepted directly on February 10th.
The reviewing process was average in speed, but the outcome was very good. I want to thank Heloise de Oliveira Pastore for editing. This is also the first article of mine that was accepted without any need for modifications.

roiten 2021-12-30

Oct 18, 2021 submission
Nov 20, 2021 reversion
Dec 4, 2021 submit
Dec 29, 2021 accept

In the field of lithium-ion mesoporous materials, the initial review was quick, but there was a slight delay during the revision, possibly due to the Christmas period. Fortunately, the final outcome was positive. Wishing everyone good luck!

毛克羽 2021-12-17

How long does it take to generate page numbers after receiving?

小文 2021-11-04

Submitted Jul 10, 2021
Under review Jul 20, 2021
The date status has changed several times during the process.
Required Reviews Completed Oct 24, 2021
Revise Oct 27, 2021
Revision Submitted to Journal Oct 07, 2021
With editor Oct 09, 2021
Under review Oct 12, 2021
Accept Nov 04, 2021

Freddy Kleitz
Editor
During my master's program, I worked on a project that was relatively shallow and the quality of the article was average. It was rejected multiple times before being carefully revised and submitted to a 3M journal. The entire process from submission to acceptance took about 4 months. I am grateful to the editor and reviewers.

heheyuanbin 2021-11-04

Hello, I would like to ask, after the first rejection, is it the editor's suggestion to resubmit?

Dr_Dragon 2021-10-23

6.28 Submission, sent for review the next day, didn't even see "with editor".
9.06 Revision.
The editor found four reviewers, three of whom provided comments. Reviewer 1 mainly pointed out language issues, while the other two had opinions on the data, which were easily explained. Other comments were relatively easy to modify, and no additional experiments were required.
10.04 Returned for revision, during which it was sent back once due to formula formatting issues (the editor even used OneDrive to share a lesson on formula formatting in the article).
10.20 Required reviews completed.
10.21 Accepted in the morning.
Thanks to the Brazilian editor, Lima. There is a 13-hour time difference between Brazil and China. The editor basically handled the manuscript during nighttime in China, very efficiently. The speed of "with editor" and the review process was super fast. After the required reviews were completed, the results were given promptly without any delay. This article was submitted exactly one year ago and was rejected seven times before finally finding its place in MMM. I hope your journal will continue to prosper.

nuandong 2021-09-16

Finally accepted

群群杜 2021-09-08

From submission to acceptance, it has been almost 5 months of experience, which I would like to share for reference.
After 2 months, I am grateful that the editor gave me the opportunity to make revisions. There were four reviewers in the first round, and their suggestions were very constructive.
After nearly 1 month, I replied to each comment. For experiments that couldn't be supplemented, I could only provide literature and existing results as evidence.
After 1 and a half months, I am thankful that the reviewers did not nitpick (secretly pleased). In the second round, only 2 of the original 4 reviewers provided feedback, and one of them can be disregarded (only polite remarks), while the other asked me to explain a phenomenon and improve the language.
After nearly 15 days of revisions, I resubmitted the revised manuscript in the morning, and the editor approved it for acceptance on the same evening.
I wish this journal a long and prosperous future!

djcbekb 2021-09-01

Two reviewers gave major revisions, and after the modifications were made, it was submitted for review again. The reviewers' feedback was not very optimistic. Thank you to the editor for accepting it. This is my first SCI (Science Citation Index) article! I wish 3M a quick breakthrough to surpass 6!

柠檬精 2021-08-13

After two months of hard work, the manuscript is finally accepted. In short, it was very efficient and powerful. Let's work hard in 2021! Let's go 2022!

小文 2021-07-20

Jul 10, 2021 Submission
Jul 12, 2021 With Editor
Jul 20, 2021 Under Review

It was not easy at all. Thank you to the editor for reviewing it!!!

我是一只蝙蝠 2021-06-25

2021.02.21 submit
2020.02.24 with editor
2021.02.28 under review
2021.03.24 required reviews completed
2021.03.26 revise
2021.04.22 submit
2021.04.24 with editor
2021.04.28 accept

It took more than two months, but the efficiency was quite good. The three reviewers were very responsible. The first review took a long time and provided some constructive suggestions and comments. Two of the reviewers also pointed out many abbreviation and detail issues regarding figures and charts. After adding some data, correcting language errors, and redrawing two diagrams, I resubmitted it and it was quickly accepted.

奋斗的小鸟 2021-06-14

The reviewer is very good. Thank you very much to the reviewer and Professor Lima, the editor.

奋斗的小鸟 2021-06-14

2020.11.18 First submission
2020.12.15 Rejected (suggested to revise and resubmit)
During the period, the testing was improved, and the manuscript was reorganized and revised according to the reviewer's comments. (Procrastinated, took a holiday during the Chinese New Year)
2021.3.30 Resubmitted
2021.5.18 Minor revision
2021.5.19 Resubmitted
2021.5.20 Under review
2021.6.12 Accepted

理工星辰 2021-03-20

What is the reference format for this journal? Why can't I see it?

Freud 2021-02-27

2020.09.26 submit
2020.09.28 with editor
2020.10.02 under review
2021.01.11 required reviews completed
2021.01.13 revise
2021.02.01 submit
2021.02.03 under review
2021.02.17 required reviews completed
2021.02.17 revise
2021.02.23 submit
2021.02.24 with editor
2021.02.26 accept
The date for the first review has changed several times. Overall, the efficiency of MMM is quite high, as submissions usually go through "with editor" and "under review" within a few days. However, the review time may vary depending on the reviewers, and it cannot be forced. (During this long and agonizing submission process, I often come here to read everyone's experiences. Today, I shared my own submission process in the hope of providing some help to those who are currently submitting or planning to submit to MMM.)

alejandro 2021-02-24

2020.12.30 submitted to journal
2020.12.31 with editor
2020.12.31 under review
2021.01.21 major revision - One reviewer requested additional data, while another provided six comments.
2021.01.30 revision submitted to journal
2021.02.22 accept
Happy New Year 2021!!! It was a very smooth and pleasant submission experience, with the journal's efficiency being exceptionally high! Many thanks to Editor Steven Suib and the two reviewers. Also, I hope all my friends here achieve their desired outcomes and have successful submissions! May every submission be successful!!!

CQU成勇 2021-02-09

Rejection letter as follows: (This is the first time I submitted my article to this journal, and they asked me to resubmit, which is embarrassing. The main reason is that the quality of the article is not good. It was rejected after 4 days.)

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to Microporous and Mesoporous Materials.

However, it still does not meet the journal's desired standard. We regret to inform you that we cannot proceed with the formal peer review process for your manuscript.

A revised version will also not be considered.

Yours sincerely,

Eder Claudio Lima, PhD
Microporous and Mesoporous Materials

huang 2021-02-04

After receiving feedback, the second review was quickly accepted. The reviewer's comments were very constructive.