Nanomaterials

On 3rd Dec.: Submission; On 15th Dec.: First review. There were three reviewers. One reviewer was not satisfied with the part of introduction; The other two reviewers found two of the pictures also some details such as language were not satisfactory. However, the review comments given were relatively positive, stating that there was a certain degree of innovation. Of the three reviewers, two reviewers requested major revisions and one minor revision, and the editor major revision. Rewritten the introduction and supplemented the relevant data, the revised manuscript was re-submitted within 5 days as required. And the time was a bit tight. On 20th Dec., the first review comments were replied and returned; On 25th Dec., in the second review, there were still the same reviewers and basically no more other review comments. The article was majorly revised in language. On 28th Dec., it showed the article was accepted. Basically, every step has a strict due time. The speed of reviewing by this journal and the editor's reply is very fast, and each step can be clearly checked on the website. The article which has a clear logic, expression, and a certain degree of innovation could be accepted. Those who are in a hurry could consider this journal.

(16) Thank | patio

Received: 28 November 2019 / Revised: 13 December 2019 / Accepted: 18 December 2019 / Published: 20 December 2019. For the first SCI of my first-grade post-graduate, it was submitted to OE and was rejected by the reviewer due to lack of innovation, and then transferred. The editing efficiency was very high. It was sent for review the next day. Three reviewers reviewed it for about 10 days. Minor revisions were requested by 3 reviewers, and revisions by editor. But only 5 days were given. Then the reviewer and editor agreed to accept. The publication fee was about 11,000 RMB, which was actually not too expensive. Because top journals also have expensive publication fees, such as OE and NC. And before publication, one free polishing service will be offered, and you could choose to use his English revision or not. At present, I have also submitted for other free journals. The speed is really slow. It takes one month to return the review opinions. TT

(10) Thank | 硕士小陈

The review process is rigorous, but there should be a strict time limit for reviewers to upload comments, so reviewers respond quickly to comments. The manuscript was submitted for review on the second day of submission, and the first review lasted two weeks. Four reviewers, two required minor revisions, one required major revision, and one rejected it, who said that the article was not innovative. The academic editor finally gave the opportunity to us to make a major revision within 5 days. The process of major revision was too urgent. According to the reviewer’s comments, the experiment was done, the mechanism, the important parameters, and the details of the experiment were supplemented. It felt very nervous all day and night. Finally, we applied for an extension of the revision period. The editor was very good. He responded quickly, and extended it for another three days. After 8 days, we finally revised the article according to the reviewer's comments, and gave a literature review to the reviewer with rejection to explain our innovation. The four reviewers, except the one who rejected the manuscript, raised about 8 questions per person, including three or four that were difficult to answer. The responses were over 30 pages. After the revised submission, the reviewer with rejection still rejected it. Even the comment text was no different from the first review. At that time, I felt terrible. I had responded so seriously to the comments and made a literature review to explain the innovation and the difference with others' research one by one. The other reviewers all recommended to accept. I waited nervously for a day. On the third day, the assistant editor sent an email saying that the article had been accepted. I was still very happy. After all, I felt that my work was recognized. The speed afterwards was very fast. The editor sent an email on the second day of acceptance and asked us to complete the proofreading within 24 hours. The proofreading was completed on the same day and it was returned, and then it was published on the third day.

(16) Thank | CMYK

My work is on the acid hydrolysis behavior of hybrid materials. Initially submitted to Langmuir and JCIS, rejected without peer review. Then I submitted to more specialized journals, MMM and PDS, again rejected without peer review. RSC Advances sent it out for review, more than two month; 1 reviewer requested minor revision and 2 rejected. Then I decided to try an open access journal and submitted to Nanomaterials. Submitted on February 5, and received review comments February 19. One editor requested minor revision and the other suggested rejection. The editor gave the decision of rejection with the opportunity to re-submit. The reasons for rejection were just language expression and some part of the discussion not good enough. After spending 2 days to revise it, I re-submitted on the 21st, and received the comments for major revisions on March 8. It was sent to the same two reviewers. The one who rejected initially requested major revision this time, just modifying the language. Re-submitted on the same day, accepted the next day, and published online on the 14th.

(1) Thank | lvkai@caep.cn

The speed is very fast, the overhaul is generally given to five days, the time is more urgent, but the editor is quite good.It will be online in a month.

(4) Thank | 小小飞侠

Submitted for review the next dayReceived review comments after two weeks, overhaul, request to return within 5 daysAmend the second day after submissionIt’s online in a few days.It can be said that it is very speedy. If you are eager to rush an article, you can definitely consider it. It means that the charge is a bit expensive.

(0) Thank | ying

nanomaterials It is really fast 10.30 Submission 11.13 First-instance overhaul, 3 reviewers, one overhaul 10 questions butIt is a non-detailed question written by the test method. One question is 5, one is directly acceptd, the editor gives 5 days to modify the time, the 16th is returned to the revised draft, the 19th is waiting for the editorial decision, and the 22nd is accepted.Less than a month, the speed is very fast, the research content feels average, I don't know if the journal is watery, but the speed is fast and the division of the second district still feels worthy of submitment.

(0) Thank | moon1004

MDPI's 2 districts, IF=3.504, the speed is really fast, 9.12 submission, because of the format and check the reasons 9.17 resubmission, 9.23 2Overhaul 1 rejection, edited to major revision, 9.30 resubmission, 10.2 minor revision, 10.3 Accepted, 10.9 online. Layout fee is 1500 Swiss francs, review is still relatively standard, the quality of the article will not be water, we refer to nanomaterials, hope IFAs soon as possible to break 4.

(4) Thank | Nano-Xman

Journal speed, special thanks Editor:June Liang processing speed is very good, 9.7 submission, 9.11 return, 9.17 submitted revision, 9.17 minor repair, 9.19 return, 9.20 receptionThe reviewers were very serious and professional. The two reviewers, the first one raised four questions, the second one raised 12 questions, but both were better.I wish the journals better and better!

(0) Thank | 北极狼

Very fast, 8.6 submission, 8.19 return, 8.25 submitted revision, 8.26 minor repair, return on the same day, 8.28 receptionThe reviewers are very serious, and the three reviewers, the first one raised more than 20 questions...But the answer is good, still very nice

(0) Thank | microthief

Two weeks in the first trial, submitted after 10 days of overhaul, one week in the second instance, stayed in the editorial department for another week, and finally told the result reject.The second-instance expert opinion "Hence I would like to recommend this revised manuscript for publication in Nanomaterials in present form."Editable "The academic editor has decided that your paper is not suitable forNanomaterials." The reason is "Manuscript Out of Journal Scope". Why have you gone early, have you reviewed the out of journal scope for half a day?Wasting time, speechless!

(0) Thank | 囧

The article should be innovative, the review draft is very efficient, and the difficulty of the draft is generally higher.The opinions given by the reviewers are also very professional. Both reviewers are receiving, and the small repairs are returned on the same day.I hope that everyone can support the reference to nm, the impact factor is good to break 4!The

(2) Thank | hihdi66

is very fast.The review is quite strict and the depth of the content of the article is quite high.Although it belongs to Open, the quality can still be graded.The editor is very responsible, the two reviewers, the opinions are very positive, the editor requested 15 days to modify, I will repair it on the 10th day.Received directly the next day.Of course, the article can be innovative and has a certain small flaw.I would like to thank the editors in China for their praise.

(0) Thank | 237390647@qq.com

is very efficient, and the comments are very pertinent, thanks to Professor Yueyue Zhang.That is, the overhaul gave 7 days, supplemented the experimental data, changed the language, and was busy. The fourth article of the doctor can be properly graduated.

(4) Thank | jhzr

Thank you for your experience sharing, and I also won an article.The whole process took one month and the results were obtained in two weeks.The reviewer's opinion is relatively pertinent, and the journal's efficiency is particularly high.The first major overhaul was also submitted for the day, and the second minor repair was not accepted directly after three days of trial.

(2) Thank | an

1 Submitted in mid-month, 20 days in the first trial, and three reviewers, each gave ten comments and asked to change it back within ten days.The reply letter wrote nearly 30 pages, and returned to the second trial. The original two reviewers made two new comments based on the reply letter.I really didn't expect this journal to be so nb.After the second repair, I wrote another five pages and received it one week later.The rigorous result of the review is that the impact factor has increased year by year, and the journal is more optimistic.

(0) Thank | nano-com

first trial rejected, switched to journalOf materials science Directly acceptd

(0) Thank | 相信

first-instance rejected, transferred to journal of materials science directly acceptd

(0) Thank | 相信

downstairs that buddy, before submittingIf you don't look at the website, do you want to open the journal?I also selectd for this IQ, and it was also served...Still black journal, 12 months review, is Nima a stupid?

(7) Thank | dftkiiu

Dizzy, such an important point comment actually did not mention, this journal is to charge, everyone pays attention to

(0) Thank | heima

Journals are highly efficient and have strict review requirements.Generally, the results of the review are given within 2 weeks, and it is hoped that the journal impact factor will break 4!

(0) Thank | wueyuyx

reviewing the speed is very fast, a good journal, the person in charge should vigorously promote the citation of the paper, in factIt's very easy to do it. The domestic Nano-micro Letter is based on a small number of articles, and the relationship is published. Once the article is up, it is definitely 3 or less. It is recommended that you select for NM, and many references

(0) Thank | nikou

I just made a mistake. I want to ask a article published in the journal nanomaterials. It has been in May, but in the web of science, I can only find the article in January 2017.,How is this going?Isn't it sci included?Can this journal know what to say?thank you very much!

(0) Thank | 190188519@qq.com

I want to ask a ha nanomaterials thisThe articles published in the journals have been in May, but in the web of science, only the articles in July 2017 can be found. What is going on?Is it not included in SCI?Can this journal know what to say?thank you very much!

(0) Thank | 190188519@qq.com

can only say that this journal is very fast, within 20 days of the first trial, the opinions of the two reviewers, opinions areVery pertinent, the editor gave the overhaul, gave 10 days, made up some experiments and submitted the revised draft. The second trial was slightly slower. It took two weeks to notify the reception, but it was published very quickly after receiving it. It was officially published two or three days later.It is.Although this journal is OA, but the review is more formal, it is definitely not given to the money, and the impact factor is calculated. This year is estimated to be around 3.6, which is still much higher than last year.

(8) Thank | haaogagiejpeogg