You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.
We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.
-
1Yeah some of that isn't so unusual. Now that I think about it the worst examples of bad reviewers have come from the highest-impact journals I've submitted to; the reviewer who went off on my use of the oxford comma; the one(s) who denied the validity of undergraduate-level mathematical fundamentals; the one who I'm pretty sure has a severe vision problem (speaking of which, did you provide the double-spaced single-column version?) and stuff like that.– A Simple AlgorithmCommented May 30, 2018 at 3:36
-
2But at least they looked at your paper! ;-)– doctorerCommented May 30, 2018 at 3:49
-
My point is, while all of those examples you noted may support the big picture of a system meltdown, many (most?) of them may actually just be "innocent" crappy reviews confusing the issue further. I've also had reviewers dismiss my manuscript as plagued by grammatical errors, based on only two errors or so.– A Simple AlgorithmCommented May 30, 2018 at 4:39
-
Nah. I have thought that many times, and re-read the reviewers' comments to make sure. As I say, the third review could possibly, at a stretch, be refering to my paper. But the other 2 definitely are not. One starts: "The paper is a review of x in country y", while the paper bears NO relation to x and doesn't mention y. The second is very specific: "The word x is misspelt on page y", "Figure a on page b is captioned incorrectly" where I have not used the word x, there is no figure a, etc. There is no question in my mind that at least 2 of the reviews were written for diffent paper (s).– doctorerCommented May 30, 2018 at 4:49
- Correct minor typos or mistakes
- Clarify meaning without changing it
- Add related resources or links
- Always respect the author’s intent
- Don’t use edits to reply to the author
-
create code fences with backticks ` or tildes ~
```
like so
``` -
add language identifier to highlight code
```python
def function(foo):
print(foo)
``` - put returns between paragraphs
- for linebreak add 2 spaces at end
- _italic_ or **bold**
- quote by placing > at start of line
- to make links (use https whenever possible)
<https://example.com>
[example](https://example.com)
<a href="https://example.com">example</a>
A tag is a keyword or label that categorizes your question with other, similar questions. Choose one or more (up to 5) tags that will help answerers to find and interpret your question.
Use tags that describe what your question is about, not what it merely relates to. For example almost every question on this site is eventually related to research, but only questions about performing research should be tagged research.
Use tags describing circumstances only if those circumstances are essential to your question. For example, if you have a question about citations that came up during writing a thesis but might as well have arisen during writing a paper, do not tag it with thesis.
- complete the sentence: my question is about...
- use tags that describe things or concepts that are essential, not incidental to your question
- favor using existing popular tags
- read the descriptions that appear below the tag
If your question is primarily about a topic for which you can't find a tag:
- combine multiple words into single-words with hyphens (e.g. graduate-admissions), up to a maximum of 35 characters
- creating new tags is a privilege; if you can't yet create a tag you need, then post this question without it, then ask the community to create it for you