Ethnographic Arms & Armour
 

Go Back   Ethnographic Arms & Armour > Discussion Forums > Ethnographic Weapons
FAQ Calendar Today's Posts Search

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 31st May 2006, 08:34 AM   #4
Rivkin
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 655
Default

Ok, here is an example of peer review criticism. It is somewhat on a better side (!!!) negative review of one of my articles:

"Overall the paper is weak in style, content and relevance.... In content and relevance, the paper may have indicated interesting issues, but little is gained from this work.... not new and has been thoroughly studied...It lacks content, style and relevance. I would discourage the authors of resubmitting...."

Now this is not so bad. I skipped all the technical and paper-related commentaries, but trust me - I had received ones 1000% meaner - this is sort of business-like.

Now to my question - does it work differently when one submits to things like Met Journal ? Again, no evil will or hidden direspect, I honestly whant to know what kind of level of criticism one usually sees in the community ?
Rivkin is offline   Reply With Quote
 


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:08 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Posts are regarded as being copyrighted by their authors and the act of posting material is deemed to be a granting of an irrevocable nonexclusive license for display here.