GEOFLUIDS

The speed of receiving the first review comments was very fast, less than 40 days. However, after submitting the revised manuscript, a small problem was discovered, so it had to be re-reviewed, which delayed the process for about three months. The communication efficiency with the editor is still very high. I wish Geofluids continued success.
Submission date: July 6th;
Review comments returned on August 13th, minor revisions, with 8 review comments;
Revised manuscript uploaded on August 17th, but the status remained as "Pending Approval" for 2 months;
Email sent on October 27th to inquire about the progress, and the editorial department replied that it was due to the reviewer's affiliation issue, so it was sent for another review;
Second set of review comments received on December 5th, still minor revisions;
Revised manuscript uploaded on December 12th;
Acceptance notice received on December 16th.

Submitted in November of the 21st year, rejected one month later, with the reason being two reviewers requesting revisions and one rejecting the manuscript. The article was then extensively revised based on the previous feedback.
Resubmitted on March 2nd.
Received reviewer comments on March 9th, requiring minor revisions, but there were a lot of suggestions, possibly reviewed by six reviewers because one of them was Reviewer 6.
Returned for revisions on March 22nd, pending approval for two days.
Received acceptance notification on March 24th.
Both rounds of review were conducted promptly. The editor was also very responsible, responding quickly to inquiries, rejections, and acceptance.