Reviews for "Landscape and Urban Planning"

Journal title	Average duration			Review reports (1^st review rnd.)
(click to go to journal page)	1^st rev. rnd	Tot. handling	Im. rejection	Number	Quality	Overall rating	Outcome
Landscape and Urban Planning	11.7 weeks	19.0 weeks	n/a	3	4 (very good)	4 (very good)	Accepted
Landscape and Urban Planning	Motivation: The review reports we have received were great: detailed, useful, polite, and encouraging acceptance after the reasonable revisions. The communication with the editor was pretty good as well. However, we also feel that the process should have been shorter: receiving the reviews took the time (e.g. more than a month after revising the paper appropriately and agreeing to nearly all the comments of the reviewers), and on a few occasions the editor's turnaround was not very quick (e.g. it took a few weeks to send the paper for review).
Landscape and Urban Planning	23.6 weeks	31.0 weeks	n/a	3	4 (very good)	4 (very good)	Accepted
Landscape and Urban Planning	Motivation: Most of the review reports were of high quality and supportive. They have helped to improve the paper. However, the first round took long (more than 5 months), but that's not necessarily the fault of the editor or the journal. The communication with the editor was perfect.
Landscape and Urban Planning	n/a	n/a	21.0 days	n/a	n/a	n/a	Rejected (im.)
Landscape and Urban Planning	Motivation: The paper was rejected by the editor arguing that it was out of the scope of the journal. That is fair, the decision was well-argued and polite, but it would be better if a desk rejection did not take that much time.
Landscape and Urban Planning	15.4 weeks	40.0 weeks	n/a	3	4 (very good)	2 (moderate)	Accepted
Landscape and Urban Planning	Motivation: After submitting the revised version in November 2013, we got contacted by the journal on 15-01-2014. The editor had noted that a large portion of reviewer 1's comments were excluded from the decicision letter of 31-08-2013. He attached the full comments of reviewer 1 and asked for a detailed response to these comments, as soon as possible. We submitted the second revised version of the paper on 27-01-2014. As such, due to the journal's mismanagement the whole proces lasted at least a few months more. I couldn't specify this particular process in the questions above.
Landscape and Urban Planning	27.0 weeks	57.6 weeks	n/a	3	4 (very good)	3 (good)	Accepted
Landscape and Urban Planning	n/a	n/a	7.0 days	n/a	n/a	n/a	Rejected (im.)
Landscape and Urban Planning	17.4 weeks	17.4 weeks	n/a	3	2 (moderate)	0 (very bad)	Rejected
Landscape and Urban Planning	9.7 weeks	40.0 weeks	n/a	3	3 (good)	0 (very bad)	Accepted