CATENA

Later, I went to ScienceDirect to search this publisher's note Catena, to see if this journal has special requirements. Unexpectedly, I saw this statement: Dear Reader, On behalf of the journal CATENA, I would like to inform you that the legal correctness of elements of the U shaped line in the map of China (Fig.1) in the article “Improving sediment load estimations: The case of the Yarlung Zangbo River (the upper Brahmaputra, Tibet Plateau)” is disputed in international law, diplomacy and politics. It is not recommended that you submit to this amazing journal. At least you are not recommended to choose this editor for your submission.

(0) Thank | The Daylight

This journal is amazing. I have never seen such a chief editor (J.A.M. Temme, Kansas State University). The reason for rejection of the article is as follows: Figs indicate the southern Chinese sea as Chinese territory. This addition to the figure has nothing to do with the contents of the paper and is merely added as a political statement. This issue is disputed in international law, diplomacy and politics. See also the publisher's note. Taffi, M., 2019 Publisher's note Catena 172.

(5) Thank | The Daylight

The impact factor for Catena has been stable for the past few years; this is a good journal for soil science publications. To be honest, I ended up publishing in Catena after I was rejected from Geoderma. My manuscript was reviewed and accepted within two months – very impressed with this journal. My only other piece of advice is to format and submit your article as recommended by the journal (this can save a lot of time and emails).

(0) Thank | Anonymous

My manuscript is quite fast, submitted on October 7th, 18th, and the results of the external review on November 1st will be revisited around December 10th, January 15th, 2019.Left and right second-instance opinions, repaired on January 24, received on the 29th

(0) Thank | 安小默

2018.3.1 Submission2018.5.12 Overhaul, 3 reviewers have a total of ten comments, very positive, the editor gave a major overhaul2018.9.23 Rework, procrastination...2018.11.22 Intermediate repair, plus 2 new reviewers, and submitted 10 small comments2018.11.29 repair2018.12.10 minor repair, because of the addition of two new authors, let the confirmation letter2018.12.11 Rework2019.1.22 ReceivingAccording to the citations of last year, the final impact factor in 19 years should be around 3.5, the speed is really slow, and the emergency graduation select

(4) Thank | 朱小抗113

2018-4-18 with editor2018-12-10 minor revision2019-1-21 acceptFor the first 8 months, please consider it if you want to select.

(2) Thank | 因为不变

From initial submission to first decision, 28 days.The speed was unexpected.Hope to have a good result

(6) Thank | 拾艺

My ten months gave a major overhaul and is now being revised. Most of the articles in this journal have been submitted for more than one year, special pit

(0) Thank | 路人斌

This journal is really too slow. After submiting for 6 months, we are still inviting reviewers. Everyone must be in a hurry and don’t select. It’s really anxious, I want toRetracted.Moreover, it is more than half or more from the time of submitment. It is too slow.

(3) Thank | 一二三

The review was quick, and the results were returned in less than two months. The overhaul was given for three months. Because the experiment was to be completed, the draft was submitted in the past three months.After another month, the opinions were minor; after three days of return, I received it one week.

(3) Thank | 韩朔

Connected:Decison in process 7.16.2018Decison in process 7.17.2018Moderate revison 7.17.2018Authorized submitted 9.5.2018Editor assigned 9.6.2018Reviewers invited 9.20.2018I feel that the efficiency of editing is not too high.Submitted for repair to more than 20 days now, the reviewer has not received the manuscript

(2) Thank | osborn

2018.04.16 Submission2018.05.28 overhaulOverhaul two experts only gave 7 big opinions, gave them 3 months, and dragged them to the last week before returning to the draft...2018.08. 19 Rework2018.09.18 receivingThe speed is really fast, and the review period depends on the efficiency of the reviewer. I think this is fast.

(23) Thank | skydj

Today it has become under review, for 8 months, stillNo news.无语

(1) Thank | 路人斌

Review for 8 months, see todayWhen I got to the editor, I didn’t know what the result was, oh, too slow, and cautious.

(0) Thank | 路人斌

I thought that the second district was a good journal. I didn’t expect the editor to be too perfunctory. I was super irresponsible. I gave the opinion in the first instance. The opinion was very good. I submitted it very seriously and the second trial experienced 4After a month, the final editor refused according to the reviewer's opinion. It was found that the reviewer's opinion was other manuscripts. The burner was not right, and the article was not correct, and then the email was appealed.The editorial department did not respond!The rigor and seriousness of the former superstitious foreigners, I did not expect it to be very ridiculous!

(7) Thank | Anonymous

initial submission 4.11.2018Editor assigned 4.16.2018Under review 5.8.2018Under review 5.23.2018Under review 6.1.2018Under editor evaluation 7.6.2018Currently in the same result

(0) Thank | osborn

I don’t know how slow it is, submitted in 2016, now one and a half years have passed, still in the review, really anxious!

(2) Thank | zm

review comments differ greatly, three reviewers, gave aOverhaul, and after minor repairs, the second district regular journal, published still has a certain degree of difficulty

(0) Thank | 不小水的鱼

2 months under review, review for more than three months.Experts have raised many questions.The low impact factor of

(2) Thank | yoyoyoyoyoyo

I used to listen to others and said it was very slow, but this submission was quickly reviewed.Two reviewers, only one proposed six amendments.After receiving the repair, it was received very quickly. The language requirement was really high. At the time, there was no touch up at the time of submission, and it was directly returned to request to modify the language.This year's impact factor has dropped a bit, but it is acceptable.

(5) Thank | zcl

Very good journal, the editor is very friendly!2014-2015 If=2.820. The language is required to be excellent, and the article should have a bright spot.

(1) Thank | sxh

from submission to receiving comments for a total of 4 monthsThe evaluations of the two reviewers were all good. After the revision, the original reviewers were reviewed for one month and received directly.The requirements for English are very high. Before submiting, it is best to let foreigners look at it. The innovation is strong. The reviewers feel very responsible. The editors deal with the papers quickly. The article is published online after receiving it, but the volume number will take a long time to give.I hope to improve.

(1) Thank | Anonymous

This journal is still good, although it was overhauled, but it was finally published, and it is also the best journal I published.

(3) Thank | Anonymous

Now how there is no introduction to the impact factor?

(0) Thank | Anonymous

Journal Homepage URL: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find ... ription#description

(0) Thank | Anonymous