(no subject)
The bad news:
M&I, the journal i re-submitted my paper to 2 months ago, says my paper is "not acceptable for publication in its present form."
The good news:
Dr P told me that that translates to "make the changes the reviewrs suggested, write a letter to the editor explaining why the reviewers didn't get the point of my paper, and wait for them to tell me the publication date"
So, keeping my fingers, toes, and extremities crossed...
Aside from that, both reviewrs wrote basically the same thing:
Reviewer 1: "The topic is very important. The work although not very original is carefully conducted and the results are convincing. In addition, the manuscript is very well written and presented. "
Reviewer 2: " The experiments are straightforward and convincing, and the paper is clearly and well written. However, it is not clear how these observations go beyond those that have previously been reported, especially reference 25."
Also, Luci told me that reviewers NEVER metion that a paper is "well written" unless is extremedly well written, so I'll take that as a clap on the shoulder to my writting abilities (and my boss' editing).
M&I, the journal i re-submitted my paper to 2 months ago, says my paper is "not acceptable for publication in its present form."
The good news:
Dr P told me that that translates to "make the changes the reviewrs suggested, write a letter to the editor explaining why the reviewers didn't get the point of my paper, and wait for them to tell me the publication date"
So, keeping my fingers, toes, and extremities crossed...
Aside from that, both reviewrs wrote basically the same thing:
Reviewer 1: "The topic is very important. The work although not very original is carefully conducted and the results are convincing. In addition, the manuscript is very well written and presented. "
Reviewer 2: " The experiments are straightforward and convincing, and the paper is clearly and well written. However, it is not clear how these observations go beyond those that have previously been reported, especially reference 25."
Also, Luci told me that reviewers NEVER metion that a paper is "well written" unless is extremedly well written, so I'll take that as a clap on the shoulder to my writting abilities (and my boss' editing).