plos怎么回事，最近又篇稿子，半年多了，还在under review

89 0

今天去撤稿了，把under review的稿子撤了回来。

102 0

小木虫讨论的很激烈，将plos one列为垃圾期刊，申请基金的时候，在此杂志发表过论文的，一律被拿下，不知道各位在此杂志发表论文的同学有何看法阿。

121 0

有的 Plos One Academic Editor 好象缺乏正义感和公正性，因为主持公正怕得罪学术界有权力和影响人物。俺的稿子一审3个reject，1个major，1个minor，2个accept就直接退稿，连major revision的机会都不给。俺曾经审过一篇Plos one的稿件，一审3个reject，一个major，这个Academic Editor 都给了个major revision，虽然major revision后还是退稿。

108 0

俺最近投了一篇稿子到 Plos One，七个评阅人，3 rejects, 1 major, 1 minor, 2 accept.
3 rejects 是俺预先声明的 rival expert 给的。一个 rival expert 评阅人 Reviewer #4 把俺的稿件狠批了一通，说：“Perhaps the most outrageous claim made by the author is a proof that Planck constant is a Lorentz invariant. （译文：最不靠谱的是声称证明了普朗克常数是洛楞兹不变量）”。最后还不放心，又放了一句狠话：“Even if the work were correct and meritorious, PLOS 1 would, I suggest, be wishing to reject it purely on the grounds that it is not new.”

Reviewer #4 用 “No” 回答评阅选择问题
“4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?”

并解释说
“No. Overall the level of English is poor, but careful copy editing should be able to make it readable. As it stands, I fear that most readers would be irritated by the quality of the English.”

看来一个人的语言水平好不好还和他发表的什么意见有关。不是吗？

137 0

现在这个杂志太慢了，去年10月投稿，审一次要三个月

98 0

"认为你回避重要文献"
---- 谢谢。但是我非常清楚地 critically “点名引用”了他们的文献。俺很是纳闷。

109 0

认为你回避重要文献

132 0

哪位高手请帮忙翻译一下：

This manuscript also sidesteps the possibly of a difficult review by omitting reference to John Smith, rather than addressing it head-on.

俺看不懂，不好答复编辑。谢谢。

145 0

都过五一去啦

143 0