认证评论 - CORROSION REVIEWS
注: 认证评论选取于全球各个学术评论平台和社交媒体。

_dave 2021-06-15

Submitted (18-Dec-2020)
Major revision (01-Mar-2021)
Reject with possible resubmission (26-May-2021)

1. The time taken by the editor may exceed that of the reviewers.
2. There were two reviewers, one provided some minor issues, while the other reviewer, who seemed to be from a different era, wrote a bunch of problems by hand, leading to a major revision suggested by the editor.
3. After completing the major revision, one reviewer suggested accepting the paper directly, but the ancient reviewer claimed there were still issues without specifying them. In the end, the editor rejected or suggested resubmission.

What frustrated me the most is that the ancient reviewer wrote down all the problems throughout the paper, but the English was completely incomprehensible. I had to guess and interpret on my own, and some of the problems were also unrelated to the field. My paper is around 20 pages long, and it took me more than 20 days to extract and address each problem handwritten by the ancient reviewer, replying point by point. The response alone ended up being over 20 pages. However, it was all in vain as the ancient reviewer didn't acknowledge it and dismissed me with a few simple words. I'm frustrated, I give up.

诗和远方 2021-05-15

Does anyone know how much the layout fee for Corrosion reviews is, and how to pay?

Create your own webinar

Interested in hosting your own webinar? Check the schedule and propose your idea to the Peeref Content Team.

Create Now

Become a Peeref-certified reviewer

The Peeref Institute provides free reviewer training that teaches the core competencies of the academic peer review process.

Get Started