I think that 6 years for reviewing a ms cannot be justified by any means. In 4 years after acceptance many a things might change.

This is highly unacceptable! Why should the publication of research findings take such a long time. This defeats the relevance, currency and potency of the paper which may have been more beneficial the time period the research was undertaken. I wouldn't have waited for that so long to keep idle from visibility to the entire global academic fraternity my research findings!

Usually it does not take so long time. It is strange to hear.

I am actively associated with one journal. I think there is some mistake in any stage. It can not happen.

this is what i am surprised. Max it may take 12-15months from submission to acceptance.. after that another 1 month for publication. These are maximum.. anything beyond these is bit strange

there are some journal doing like this, at least it was published.

Arabian Journal of Geosciences took more than 1 and half year for starting of review process, after sending many reminders they said can not find the reviewers. it happened to me. i don't understand why they take so long time for even finding the reviewers even though my paper with in the aim and scope of the journal.

I know a case from a Journal, on which the authors took more than 7 years to complete the requested changes (the main author left the postdoc and then, he was working full time without time to work on the paper). However, .... four years after the paper was accepted to be finally published is a long time.

In USA (Botany), at least I know a Journal which published the papers between 4 and 5 years after accepted. However, that lead that many people stop to submit papers for the same reason. Then, the editor in chief was fired and now it is working fine

its unfortunate and it defeats the relevance, and novelty of research for present arena. After acceptance, more than 6months is definitely unacceptable.

It is strange and unfortunate.