I once emailed a synopsis of a paper to a journal editor who said they were interested then I spent several weeks writing the paper only for it to be rejected immediately for being outside the scope of the journal. Moral: don't always believe what one editor tells you with a multi editor journal.

Dear Laura,

Many a things can happen but be optimistic. Wish you best of luck.

Subir.

Hi Laura,

Many (many) years ago I submitted one of my first manuscripts to a magazine-style journal. The subject was 'how to write an article' and I thought that I had done a pretty good job. One reviewer suggested that it was more appropriately titled 'how NOT to write an article'. With hindsight, they were harsh - but they were correct. It never got published!!

I had once submitted a paper to a British Journal of International repute in the area of Mechanics and Applied Mathematics. The reviewer, a FRS, (name withheld) gave very favourable comments but added a line at  the end stating that this paper is not suitable for this particular Journal. He suggested the name of another International Journal and advised me to send the paper to that Journal. He even permitted me to enclose his review and comments to the Editor of the new Journal. I did as advised  and within a fortnight got the acceptance of the paper from the Editor. Grateful to the Reviewer, a great person.

The reviewer rejected the manuscript and wrote about my work "...because of the light it sheds on a largely unfamiliar geographical area for many or most our readers".

• Worst:  A reviewer wrote three pages describing why his own research (which was not rigorous) was proof that my journal article submission should not be published.  My submission refuted some of his work.
• Best:  "Wow!  This is important!"  This comment was from another reviewer for the same journal article submission described above.  My research article was accepted and published.  :-)

Worst: What is new and Where is the science ?

Best: The submitted manuscript presents significant contribution to the existing literature. 

Worst was along the lines of - "This research will never get published in a scientific journal!". Well, it did get published two years later (after 2 more rejections)! Never lose faith in your work. Good luck.

From a slightly different perspective, as an editor, I used to request referee reports. The worst were always "Accept with no changes" or "Reject", i.e., no other comments or feedback to the author or to the editor. 

My worst (i.e. most ignorant) comment ever came from a reviewer who objected to my spelling of “judgement”. Rather than recognizing that “judgement” and “judgment” are acceptable variants, with one being more common in the US or Canada than the other, the referee claimed that there was a difference in meaning and my variant made no sense in the context. 

Well, i have experienced a lot, but to me, the most frustrating are:

- The conclusions are not supported by the presented data.

- The authors need to perform more control experiments to verify their findings.

I really encourage you to watch this funny video in this regard

Kind Regards

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VRBWLpYCPY

Actually they used to criticize without understanding the content. Since our work is modeling they're supposed to appreciate it but do not. This is the highlight of my experience.

One of my colleagues rejected a paper mentioning deficiencies and mistakes in the paper. The mistakes were at the grass root level and the author was required to do a lot of work before resubmission. The author took the comments in the right spirit and resubmitted the paper after 6 months. The paper was finally accepted. The author profusely thanked the reviewer. But no body knows the name of the reviewer because reviewers names are not published along with the paper. This must change. The names of the reviewers must be published along with the paper, if reviewers agree to it.

Reviewer at first rejected my paper. When I pointed out the error on his part, apologised and approved my paper. The reviewer was known to me.

The best comment after submission was "Accepted with minor revision"

Happy moments

I appreciate your answer Fathy.

The worst: "The English not better than a grade 3 repeater".

Article finally accepted.

Both should be short.

I can't remember the exact words but was something like " the English is poor"

Before about 10 years ago, a reviewer commented "Are you Einstein?"

and till this moment I do not what was that reviewer meant? By the ways I am always presenting a similarity between human and metals.

Regards,

Emad

the worst comments by a reviewer were the paper is rejected. it was worst comment for me but become calm when it was accepted in reputable journal. i was thinking that reviewer has not seen the article properly.

The worst comment " Accepted after major revision" and the best comment "Accepted after minor corrections".

Interesting Question.

The worse forever:

" Now to proceed further for PDF building, to activate DOI link and publishing, please pay the publication charges 1019 USD at the earliest possible. "

My research history is divided to two period: 1.Before this email 2.After this email. ha ha ha

That's the tactics of predatory journals. Some tell in advance, some just before publication!

Exactly, and now I've got what the invalid journals used to accomplish about amateur writers. Although, there are a cascade of valid journals that are supposed to charge at first but not unexpected at the end. Overall that was an awful experience.

Late to the party with this response, but the worst review I've ever received was "nothing new here. Reject". That was the review in its entirety.

As an editor, the worst ones are those which say "accept subject to including these 20 references", all published by the referee.

The worst comment from a reviewer is when the reviewer didn't even give a minute of his (her) time to make a reviewing comment. Just "Rejected" with a big "R" after four months from submission

After 7 months of reviews, the comment was...

"The authors does not have enough experience as they are new to this field so they do not qualify to write a review article ."

Senthil Kumar Kaliyavaradhan Let me guess, did all of the references you were asked to cite have a common author? When I've had this as Editor I've made it clear in any decision letter that this request only needs to be acted on if the references add value to the paper. (It's the most polite way of saying that the reviewer is being a fool, ignore them).