Is there a template available?

(0) 讚！ | Lee李

Where can I get a copy of this template?

(0) 讚！ | 1178092058

Posted on November 24th, at that time without using a template, the initial review considered the article to be too long, but felt the quality was good, and suggested that we shorten it or submit it to "Tetrahedron". After using the template, it exceeded three pages, so it was submitted again on November 26th. 
On November 27th, it passed the initial review, and on the 29th, the manuscript was assigned a number and sent for review. 
Received minor revision comments on December 2nd. 
Submitted the revised version on December 4th. 
Accepted on December 8th. 
Such a speedy process! The Indian editor is so efficient!

(1) 讚！ | ljb

An old-brand journal. The impact factor has been fluctuating around 2–2.5; the review cycle is short; the manuscripts was submitted before Christmas and it had not been sending for reviewers until after the Christmas holiday, and minor revision was required by the reviewers one week later. There were mainly language issues and omission of figures. There were no substantial changes or doubts about the content. It was directly accepted one week after the revision submitted. It is indeed a great gift for the New Year.

(2) 讚！ | 无用君

The review results were received in 3 weeks, and it was submitted a week after the major revision was made. It got accepted on the second day. After 2 weeks, it was online. The speed is very fast and the efficiency is high.

(0) 讚！ | ylj1089

However, there are exceptions. After returning to the overhaul, I will select again. This time is a little longer. It takes more than three months from the first submission to the acceptance, and finally accepts.

(0) 讚！ | 匿名

with editor Status has been a month, have not received the message

(0) 讚！ | 匿名

I have made 22 compounds, infrared, nuclear magnetic resonance, carbon spectrum, mass spectrometry.Still need elemental analysis?

(0) 讚！ | 匿名

Editor is an academician of Lin Guoqiang, the processing speed is very fast, one month to review comments, two months online

(3) 讚！ | 匿名

recently submitted an article, half a month to the news, the middle may be because the Chinese New Year has been delayed for half a month, two reviewers agree, a minor repair.Added three experiments, took 10 days, uploaded after minor repairs, and accepted it directly after one week.It feels very fast.A good publication.

(0) 讚！ | 匿名

TL also received articles on natural products, and it feels good. After all, the JNP impact factor of natural products is only 2.8, and the light of TL is also 2.6, which is compared with Chinese people who only look at the impact factors.is attractive.The review is relatively fast, and there is news for more than a month. Compounds require less novelty than OL, but they also have some structural features.There are better compounds that can't be sent OL can consider this journal.After the New Year's Day, I selectd and returned to the comments after receiving a small change.The editor of China is Mr. Lin Guoqiang.

(0) 讚！ | 匿名

A very good journal, the review period is also very fast.It feels better than sy and has a wide reputation.As for the repetitiveness of the above article, I will not mention it. I can do it, and I understand the effect.I was touched by the judging enthusiasm, and every grammatical mistake and misuse was changed...Final review comments: 3 recommendations, edit: strengthen the English level.....

(0) 讚！ | 匿名

Tragedy, but the reason for the rejection of the editor is very funny, saying that my content is similar to a piece.But in fact, the difference is very large.The person used a non-recyclable catalyst, I used a load-type recyclable catalysis; the oxidant used a high concentration of hydrogen peroxide (more than 60%, the concentration is low, the yield is very low or not), I use lowAt 30%; the catalytic system is different, the substrate is completely different, I have done a lot of system expansion....... It is difficult to understand!......

(1) 讚！ | 匿名

还

(0) 讚！ | 匿名

It feels very simple and fast, a journal, three weeks back, three reviewers, one agree, twoMinor repair, minor repair is to accept some literature and accepted.

(0) 讚！ | 匿名

40 days, two reviewers, the first one passed directly, the second added 3 articles passed.The work that needs to be done is a bit new and the working system is fine.

(0) 讚！ | 匿名

depressed, submitted for a month is still in the "with editors" status, I do not know how to deal with

(0) 讚！ | 匿名

19 days back to the news, the three reviewers agree, one passed directly, two minor repairs.

(0) 讚！ | 匿名

How can I not register?

(0) 讚！ | 匿名

The review speed is fast, the news is given in two weeks, directly acceptd, but the quality of the above article is average, the typical three-zone article, only one reviewer, I am through twoThe same situation.

(0) 讚！ | 匿名

Journal Homepage URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00404039

(0) 讚！ | 匿名

The review period is about 30 days, which is relatively easy.Someone in our group sent it, and soon it was OK

(0) 讚！ | 匿名

TL It was very inefficient, much slower than RSC and ACS, and it was told for a grammatical error after a week of state (with state).Let me revise, and send the articles they have sent to modify the company's advertisements, xx.Changed to 2 days to return, the state is still techenique check, after 3 days to change, and later reviewed for more than a month, the revised state has been subbmited, and changed to editor after 2 days, that is, at least 2 daysNo one is taking care of your article. Now it’s been a week since I’ve been quiet... I’ve been submiting in RCS earlier than TL and ACS late than TL. The article has accepted the Internet and has been modified once.

(0) 讚！ | 匿名

is going downhill. I used to think that this journal is very good. Now I think it is very bad. It’s mainly because the reviewer is not working. I recently selectd.In the article, two of the three reviewers agreed, and the third reviewer actually reviewed the manuscript in Chinese, disagreeing with the publication on the grounds that there was no discussion mechanism.The editor finally rejected the draft. In short, it was still the same sentence. The reviewer group could not do it and lacked the necessary qualities. As a result, the impact factor has been declining and the quality has also dropped significantly.

(0) 讚！ | 匿名