Timeline for 13 months and not even one report. what would you do?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 30, 2016 at 22:49 | comment | added | ckufer | @Tom: This is spot on and I wish more people knew about it; The LMS family of journals is quite average but they are very strict about selecting the most exceptional average paper that they can lay their hands on. | |
| Nov 25, 2012 at 18:18 | comment | added | Lasse Rempe | @Andy, that's really unacceptable in my view. When a journal asks you to make revisions to the paper, you ought to be able to expect that they are likely to accept it if these are made to the referee's satisfaction (barring anything unforeseen happening). | |
| Nov 25, 2012 at 1:34 | history | made wiki | Post Made Community Wiki by François G. Dorais | ||
| Nov 25, 2012 at 0:43 | comment | added | Andy Putman | @Lasse Rempe-Gillen : I have had papers rejected by good but not top journals despite unambiguously positive referee reports (in fact, on one occasion said rejection came two years after initial submission after I performed substantial revisions for them). It's not common, but it does happen. And, of course, I won't submit to those journals again. | |
| Nov 24, 2012 at 23:03 | comment | added | Lasse Rempe | Hi Tom, I certainly didn't mean to suggest that a positive referee's report is a guarantee of acceptance. I don't think I have had a paper rejected by e.g. the main LMS or AMS journals (excluding JAMS of course, which is one of the very top mathematics journals) when the referee clearly recommended publication (or have recommended publication of a paper myself and then heard that it was rejected). But perhaps that experience isn't typical! | |
| Nov 24, 2012 at 20:02 | comment | added | Tom Leinster | Lasse, I think it's not just those journals. For example, the London Mathematical Society stable of journals get far more positive referee's reports than papers they have space to publish. For Geometry & Topology (and maybe other journals in that family), at least three (?) of the editorial board need to approve the paper, which doesn't always happen even with a positive report. | |
| Nov 24, 2012 at 19:19 | comment | added | Lasse Rempe | In my experience, most journals except the very top ones (Annals, Acta, Inventiones and a few others) tend to follow the referee's recommendation. A reasonable referee will reject a paper quickly if they are going to reject it, so I hope for you that they are simply very busy and just need to be prodded a bit by the editor. | |
| Nov 24, 2012 at 17:15 | comment | added | IMeasy | "If the report does recommend acceptance, then I would expect that the journal would be inclined to follow the referee's advice." Let's hope this! I've heard scary things.... | |
| Nov 24, 2012 at 17:15 | vote | accept | IMeasy | ||
| Jan 17, 2013 at 11:14 | |||||
| Nov 24, 2012 at 17:03 | history | answered | Lasse Rempe | CC BY-SA 3.0 |