Submitted (18-Dec-2020)
Major revision (01-Mar-2021)
Reject with possible resubmission (26-May-2021)

1. The time taken by the editor may exceed that of the reviewers.
2. There were two reviewers, one provided some minor issues, while the other reviewer, who seemed to be from a different era, wrote a bunch of problems by hand, leading to a major revision suggested by the editor.
3. After completing the major revision, one reviewer suggested accepting the paper directly, but the ancient reviewer claimed there were still issues without specifying them. In the end, the editor rejected or suggested resubmission.

What frustrated me the most is that the ancient reviewer wrote down all the problems throughout the paper, but the English was completely incomprehensible. I had to guess and interpret on my own, and some of the problems were also unrelated to the field. My paper is around 20 pages long, and it took me more than 20 days to extract and address each problem handwritten by the ancient reviewer, replying point by point. The response alone ended up being over 20 pages. However, it was all in vain as the ancient reviewer didn't acknowledge it and dismissed me with a few simple words. I'm frustrated, I give up.

(4) 讚！ | _dave

Does anyone know how much the layout fee for Corrosion reviews is, and how to pay?

(0) 讚！ | 诗和远方

Corrosion Reviews is an international quarterly periodical. If you aren’t in a hurry to get published, this is a suitable journal for submission.

(0) 讚！ | 匿名