Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Year
5.1 weeks
5.1 weeks
n/a
3 reports
Rejected
2016
Motivation:
Two Referees recommended revision. The third one commented "Mechanism is speculative" To some extent all mechanisms are speculative! The advantage of using staring material was overlooked by referee. He wrote following
Significance: Average (not suitable for Organometallics)
Novelty: Average (not suitable for Organometallics)
Broad Interest: Average (not suitable for Organometallics)
Has excellent/average to be interpretted seperately for each journal
Significance: Average (not suitable for Organometallics)
Novelty: Average (not suitable for Organometallics)
Broad Interest: Average (not suitable for Organometallics)
Has excellent/average to be interpretted seperately for each journal
0.3 weeks
0.3 weeks
n/a
3 reports
Accepted
2014
Motivation:
estions were made