荣小荣 2021-04-04

Posted on 25/4/2021, with editor on the same day, and still with editor until today. The status date has not changed. Can someone please explain what's going on? Is it always this slow now?

loading--- 2021-04-02

My review has been under review for a long time and the date has not changed. Can any expert explain the situation to me?

FSKLAJGKA 2021-04-01

For one month, "under review," the date has not changed at all. What's going on?

fighting1996 2021-03-30

Hello everyone, I would like to ask, it has been over a month since the external review, and it is still under review. The dates have changed four times during this period. What is the situation? Thank you all.

荣小荣 2021-03-30

How are things with you later? I also submitted for a week and I am still trembling with the editor.

二黑 2021-03-24

The efficiency is quite high, although there were some minor setbacks in the middle, but it was fortunate. I specialize in wetland ecological restoration and I saw everyone's sharing in the comments section. The editor selected Jan Vymazal, who, according to the comments section, is an expert in the field of wetlands (although I'm not very familiar with him).

I submitted the article in September 2020, and it took the editor a month to send it for external review. I sent an email to the editor, and the next day they replied saying that they had been unable to find a reviewer. I waited another two or three days for it to be under review. In January 2021, the first review came back with major revisions and I was given four weeks to make the changes. It was returned in February 20 (during the Chinese New Year holiday when I was at home), and it was under review again. On March 16, it was accepted.

Overall, I feel that the editor's efficiency is quite high, as they usually handle things on the same day or the next day. I am grateful for that.

武先生 2021-03-23

2020.12.15 Submitted to Journal
2020.12.16 Under Review
2021.1.14 Major revision
2021.2.9 Resubmitted
2021.2.10 Under Review
2021.2.27 Minor revision
2021.3.2 Resubmitted
2021.3.20 Accept
My first article was finally accepted! It's a great journal with a fast review process and efficient manuscript handling by the editors!

晶莹的宇 2021-03-22

3.2 submit - Submit
3.3 with editor - With editor
3.4 under review - Under review
3.5 Required Reviews Completed - Required reviews completed

Tinig Yang 2021-03-22

Without an editor, the submission is immediately under review, and then one month later, feedback for revisions was given, with the Chinese New Year in between.

Nicole* 2021-03-20

May I ask how long with the editor?

Tinig Yang 2021-03-18

1.23 submission
1.23 under review
2.24 major revision
3.9 revision
3.16 accepted

The journal has high efficiency and is the best choice for emergency graduation.

周周 2021-03-17

It has been almost three months since I submitted. There have been two changes in the "under review" status. I'm asking the experts how long it is appropriate to wait before sending an email to inquire. Graduating students are feeling anxious online.

汤小湘 2021-03-16

1.11 submission, 3.11 major revision, 3.15 break, 3.16 acceptance. This time is not bad, and the speed is also acceptable.

可可西西 2021-03-15

In the middle, there are also two Wus.

可可西西 2021-03-15

Share with everyone the specific progress of the article review, hoping it will be helpful to you. Overall, the editor is very diligent and responsible, and the review process is quite fast. I was mainly corrected a few times by the editor due to language issues, but luckily the editor did not give up on me, hehe~ Apart from that, it is still important to pay attention to the abstract, introduction, and figure captions.

Alan0918 2021-03-09

The official website of the journal shows that the number of submissions in 2020 was 31,350, the number of acceptances was 7,366, and the acceptance rate of articles was 25.1%.

旋流静态微泡浮选柱 2021-03-08

The first SCI paper of my life, I would like to thank the editors and reviewers for their contributions! The review comments were very professional and greatly helped improve the paper. During the first major revision, I modified one-third of the content. As long as I carefully followed the review comments and addressed them one by one, the issues should not be too significant (although I still had some concerns after the first major revision). After the second minor revision, the editor directly handled it and decided to accept it (within 4 hours).

I hope the overall environment continues to improve!

旋流静态微泡浮选柱 2021-03-08

2020-12-22 manuscript submitted
2020-12-23 under review
2021-01-23 major revision (7 reviewers, a total of 50 comments)
2021-02-16 revised manuscript submitted
2021-02-16 under review
2021-02-28 required reviews completed
2021-03-01 under review
2021-03-02 required reviews completed
2021-03-03 minor revision (sent back to 4 reviewers, 2 accept, 2 minor revisions: outdated data in one figure; check for language barriers)
2021-03-07 revised manuscript submitted (20:30)
2021-03-07 with editor
2021-03-07 accept (24:00)

Editor's choice: Dan Tsang (Hong Kong Polytechnic University)
The editor's efficiency is very high, providing results at 23:00 and 24:00 on two occasions, basically processing the manuscript and providing results on the same day.

周周 2021-03-08

January 2021 submission;
February suggested modifications and resubmission;
March sent back for revisions;
There were many opinions, and they were also very professional. The editor was very responsible and rigorous! Praying!

云水间 2021-03-07

I have rewritten the cover letter, explaining the situation. When you resubmit, please specify the previous editor who was responsible for you.

可可西西 2021-03-07

Generally speaking, it would be the previous editor, because in order to expedite the processing of the manuscript, it is better to have the original editor handle it, which is faster. There is also a chance for resubmission. You can take a look at the comments on the previous 10 floors.

Lling铛 2021-03-05

Do I need to rewrite the cover letter when resubmitting after being returned for plagiarism check and revision? Will the editor be the same as before?

可可西西 2021-03-05

This efficiency is really amazing. I have also won two overall championships, and the editing is pretty good. However, it is now more difficult to submit. Can we communicate? Please check the message on the 492nd floor.

是猫咪吖 2021-03-04

I'm sorry for the mistake. It was a random allocation when selecting the editor, and I was lucky to be assigned to the chief editor, Jay Gan. He is very efficient and provides very objective review comments. I hope STOTEN continues to improve and prosper.

是猫咪吖 2021-03-04

Nov. 5 Submission
Jan. 20 Major revision, 3 reviewers, one of them not listed, one provided 3 questions, and the last one gave 14 very specific, pertinent, and actionable review comments. Grateful.
Feb. 14 Revised
Feb. 14 Major revision (surprisingly efficient, received second round of comments within 7 hours of revision)
Feb. 20 Revised
Feb. 21 Accepted
During submission, reviewers were selected through system allocation, and luckily assigned to Editor-in-Chief Jay Gan. The first round of review took a bit long, possibly due to Christmas holidays, but the efficiency was very high after the first revision. The review comments were also very pertinent and helpful in improving the article significantly. Thank you very much.

Vincent H. 2021-03-03

Some recent work achievements were rejected by a top engineering and technical journal after two rounds of major revisions. So, I chose to submit to STOTEN.

Submitted on January 20, 2021.
January 21: With editor.
January 22: Under review.
Received minor revision on February 4. There were three reviewers: I believe two gave minor revisions, and one might have accepted or suggested minor revisions. They only provided a brief evaluation, stating that the research in the article is interesting and requesting a supplementary research methodology flowchart. The editor allowed four weeks for revisions.

Revised on February 23. During this period, I requested assistance from Dr. W from Cornell University and Prof. S from a research institute in the United States to improve and refine the language. Two mechanism diagrams and one flowchart were also meticulously designed by professionals.

With editor on February 26.
Under review on March 1.
Required reviews completed on March 2.
Accepted on March 3.

The efficiency of this process is truly commendable. I express my heartfelt gratitude because in my opinion, STOTEN is one of the best journals. It gives a sense of fairness, scientific pursuit, inclusiveness, and freedom compared to some other journals. Special thanks to STOTEN, and I encourage more innovative achievements to be submitted to STOTEN. I hope STOTEN continues to thrive and improve. I sincerely thank the esteemed editor H, and in the future, I will definitely express my gratitude properly if given the opportunity.

云水间 2021-03-02

2020-11-05 Manuscript submitted
2020-11-05 Rejected - Plagiarism check too high, editor requested resubmission with reduced similarity and provided positive feedback.
2020-11-06 Manuscript submitted
2020-11-07 Under review
2020-12-13 Major revision - Three reviewers, one minor revision and two major revisions. The review process was very meticulous, including many details and grammar issues.
2021-2-15 Revised manuscript submitted
2021-2-16 Under review
2021-2-17 Required reviews completed
2021-2-17 Under review
2021-3-1 Accept
Thank you Editor Yifeng Zhang and Journal Manager Pallavi Das, both individuals were very helpful! Due to having too many tasks at hand, I had to request an extension once, but both individuals were very friendly during our communications and provided a lot of assistance. The reviewers' comments were constructive and significantly improved the article.

可可西西 2021-03-01

Nov 19, 2020 submitted to journal
Three days later under review
Jan 23, 2021 major revise
Jan 29, 2020 revised
Three days later under review
Feb 19, 2021 minor revise
Feb 26, 2021 accepted
This is my first SCI paper. I heard that STOEN has a high degree of environmental recognition, so I am very lucky to be accepted. The review process was very strict and meticulous. The reviewers even checked the data and content in the appendix one by one. It is a good thing that the reviewers are serious, indicating that they highly respect everyone's labor and effort. I learned a lot during the submission and revision process.

野墅居士 2021-02-28

11.19 Submitted to journal & with Editor
11.23 Under review
12.15 Required Reviews Completed
12.21 Major Revision
1.17 Revision being Processed
1.17 With editor
1.21 Under review
1.29 Under review
2.24 Required reviews completed
2.28 Accept

The article underwent major revisions and took a month to return. The introduction was essentially rewritten. The review process was fast and the suggestions were helpful in improving the quality of the article.

陈鸭鸭 2021-02-28

On the first day, I submitted my work, but tragedy struck the next day when the editor said my research lacked international relevance.