Reviews for "TC: A Journal of Biblical Textual Criticism"

Average duration			Review reports (1^st review rnd.)
1^st rev. rnd	Tot. handling	Im. rejection	Number	Quality	Overall rating	Outcome	Year
16.0 weeks	16.0 weeks	n/a	0	n/a	0 (very bad)	Rejected	2017
Motivation: My article submission was rejected without any peer review feedback. I requested feedback and received no response.
4.6 weeks	4.6 weeks	n/a	1	4 (very good)	4 (very good)	Accepted	2015
Motivation: The Journal offered a speedy, yet rigorous, review procedure. The review wasn't all too brief: the reviewer went into some length with his most accurate summary of the overall argument of the article as well as the data presented therein. All the suggestions for improvement (all mostly minor) were useful and resulted in welcome improvements. There were also various suggestions for grammatical and stylistic improvement, which were useful as well