After more than 6 months of waiting, I have got a paper rejected because the reviewer asked to change the title, fix two references, and the Editor added to make the conclusion stronger. I am wondering if the Editor has been fair enough or just using his "authority"?
Dear Mohammad, I am convinced that many injustices are made by the reviewers and editors concerning the acceptance of papers. Unfortunately, there isn't much an author can do about it except to send the paper to another journal. I hope this time you'll be more lucky!
I wish you all the best.
You do not say which journal gave you this decision.
There are journals which receive MANY more submissions than they can publish. I know that some are cutting back on the number of allowed re-submissions. Some may be looking for excuses to reject papers so that only those which can be acceptable without major revisions are approved.
Still, six months is too long to make you wait. It indicates that the journal management is not organized.
Thanks Michael, I wish the journal editors could be little mote neutral and unbiased!
Michael W. Marek,
Thanks for your response and consolation. I truly appreciate that. Indeed I didnt mention the name as I didnt want to be mean to that journal. But I can tell you, that it is a well established journal and the rejection was done after the review process (more than 6 months). According to the reviewer - only changing the title and rewriting the conclusion was required. And I feel that, Editor's rejection because of that - by any means is not justified. S/He should find a better reason to reject if their esteemed journal is loaded with submission.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Linguistics
- Philology
- Classical Philology
- Manuscripts