Reject on May 16th as it does not fall within the scope of the journal, please provide feedback sooner

(0) 讚！ | luohuayu

On April 17th, with editor

(0) 讚！ | luohuayu

On April 17th, with Editor

(0) 讚！ | luohuayu

On April 12, with editor

(0) 讚！ | luohuayu

It took one year from submission to the first review notice, reminding once in November 23rd, and only then started to look for reviewers. Two reviewers in total, one gave minor revisions, the other raised many professional questions, accepted after revisions, the reviewer's opinions were quite professional; however, the editor directly suggested rejecting the manuscript, so I had to reject it. Is this divine operation??? Terrible journal, waste of time

(1) 讚！ | jl

I feel like you are so fast, my application has been under review for three months and it is still not done. I followed up once and it has been half a month, is there still hope?

(0) 讚！ | shulibin

My under review has been silent for 3 months, I urged once half a month ago, but still no progress. Is there still hope?

(0) 讚！ | shulibin

Decision in process to major revise is taking too long

(0) 讚！ | 大黄

The repetition rate does not exceed 20%.

(0) 讚！ | 凶巴巴

5.24 submit;
5.25 with editor;
6.6 with editor;
6.14 under review;
6.14 agreed with reviewer;
6.15 agreed with reviewer;
6.25 comments returned;
6.29 comments returned;
7.1 decision in process;
7.20 major revision;
8.24 R1 - with editor;
8.26 under review;
9.3 first revision completed;
9.19 second revision completed;
9.20 decision in process;
9.26 major revision;
10.4 R2 submit;
10.11 under review;
10.20 comments returned;
10.28 comments returned;
10.30 decision in process;
10.30 accepted.

The first submission raised many detailed and professional questions that were not previously considered in the paper. The response was nearly 30 pages long and addressed many sharp questions, which were not easy to answer. Thankfully, there were enough references to support the response, and it was considered satisfactory. The second submission also raised several detailed questions, and the response was over 10 pages long. It feels like the two responses are more exciting than the main body of the paper.

(1) 讚！ | smartboy

Submitted in early May, it took more than 20 days to be reviewed by the editor. It underwent major revisions at the end of July, and was revised again at the beginning of September. Minor revisions were made in mid-September, and it was accepted at the end of the month. The editing process started off a bit slow, but luckily I was patient enough to wait. Overall, the editing was good, except for a few reviewers who kept nitpicking. Fortunately, the editor remained objective and fair, disregarding the meaningless review comments. The acceptance was smooth~ The submission experience was decent.

(3) 讚！ | 小李子000

Hurry up and submit the manuscript, I will be back after reminding them once.

(0) 讚！ | 大魔王

It should be that the external review experts have not finished reviewing. Some experts may have refused to review or even not responded until the deadline, which slows down the process. It has been over half a month since my first review, and it is still in the "decision in process" stage with no updates. I am not sure if the editor is on vacation or on a business trip.

(0) 讚！ | smartboy

It has been two months, and it has always been under review, but there has been no progress.

(1) 讚！ | 焦虑患者

What is the required rate of similarity for this journal? Is it below 20%? The editor rejected it because the similarity rate was a bit high. Before submitting, I checked the similarity using the journal's plagiarism detection software and made the necessary changes. I'm not sure why the similarity rate is still not acceptable. It was not even sent for review, the editor directly rejected it.

(0) 讚！ | 紫轩恋雨

What is the required maximum similarity rate for this journal? Is it 20%? The editor rejected the submission because the similarity rate was a bit high. Before submitting, I checked it using the journal's plagiarism detection software and made the necessary revisions. I'm not sure why the similarity rate is still not satisfactory. It was not even sent for review and the editor rejected it directly.

(0) 讚！ | 紫轩恋雨

What is the required plagiarism rate for this journal? Is it less than 20%? The editor rejected it because the plagiarism rate was a bit high. I checked it with the journal's plagiarism detection software and made the necessary revisions, but I don't know why the plagiarism rate is still not acceptable. It was not even sent for review, the editor rejected it directly.

(0) 讚！ | 紫轩恋雨

This journal is considered quite authoritative in the field of cold region research. Compared to non-open access journals, it is relatively fast. The requirements for article quality are quite high. At that time, I was naive and submitted my manuscript without fully understanding the situation. It was rejected in about two months, but the reviewers provided many excellent suggestions. It seems that this journal has a good understanding of researchers in China. They seem to know the authors' focus on cold region engineering research like the back of their hand.

(0) 讚！ | 鲨鱼辣椒本椒

Under review on the third day of submission, the efficiency is very high. I hope everything goes smoothly in the future!

(1) 讚！ | 大雄Iwan

The speed is very fast. Submitted in November 2021, there was one major revision in between, and the second revision had very minor issues. Online by early April 2022.

(0) 讚！ | peiyi4315

Hello, the one on the 11th floor. Can you shar the submission process. My article has been submitted for 4 months, but the status is still with editor. What’s the situation?

(1) 讚！ | 明天

Reviewers were extremely unprofessional. It's weird to talk nonsense and there was just only a reviewer. The reviewer misread the data unit in the picture, and then questioned that the data should not be this and I had no common sense at all. In fact, the reviewer himself misunderstood. The reviewer did not read the article carefully, and the views raised were not related to the article at all. This journal was too ridiculous.

(7) 讚！ | Nortic-89

Received at Editorial Office:8 Jan 2018Article revised: 27 May 2018Article accepted:1 Jul 2018

(1) 讚！ | 123456789

Personally, I think that the difficulty in SCI journals should not be so high and the language should not be emphasized so much, but if you have a lot of test data, it is relatively easy to submit. The revised opinions were mainly about language and the overhaul was mainly about language also. More revisions were requested very quickly, within a month. After the overhaul, it took nearly three and a half months, but then my paper was accepted.

(2) 讚！ | donnastin1981@126.com

Personally think that the difficulty in SCI journals should not be very large, the language should pass, and a large amount of experimental data is relatively easy to send.The revised opinions are mainly about language, and the overhaul is mainly the language of change.The amendments were given very quickly, and they came out in a month. After the overhaul, they were directly acceptd for nearly three and a half months.

(0) 讚！ | donnastin1981@126.com