4 ms·
Is there any reason to believe any of those entries appeared in an actual review?
by kardos 11y ago
Is there any reason to believe any of those entries appeared in an actual review?
- danielvf 11y agoMany are taken from a Reddit thread about harsh reviews, but others do link to very official paywalled paper review pdfs.
- charlieegan3 11y agoBased on this from the about page: "Submissions should be real sentences from reviews you received." they're intended to be real. But I think it's highly unlikely for some entries.
- foldr 11y agoAnonymity in the review process has a lot of the same effects as anonymity on a site like this. It does tend to bring out the nastier side of people. These reviews are at the extreme end of the spectrum but many of them look entirely believable to me.
- geofft 11y agoYes, http://shitmyreviewerssay.tumblr.com/post/138673489984/no-new-insights-no-important-question-addressed#notes http://shitmyreviewerssay.tumblr.com/post/138673489984/no-ne... provides a source. It's non-public-access, like entirely too much of science, but I can confirm that my alma mater's subscription gives me access to an article that has the quote in question, and starts like this: Our referees, the Editorial Board Members and ad hoc reviewers, are busy, serious individuals who give selflessly of their precious time to improve manuscripts submitted to Environmental Microbiology. But, once in a while, their humour (or admiration) gets the better of them. Here are some quotes from reviews made over the past year, just in time for the Season of Goodwill and Merriment. • And here we go with the first 2009 comment: happy new environmental year dear editor! Regarding the manuscript: it is OK, I hope the flu is not infecting my review brain. • WOW! You did ‘read it with interest’ in SEVEN MINUTES??!! [Ed.: this is an author contribution in response to an editorial decision (rejection) made within 7 min of submission] [...] • The writing style is flowery and has an air of Oscar Wilde about it. and so forth.