4 ms·
Nature rejects Krebs's paper, 1937 (2010)
- lcedp 13y agoI was having a minute brain freeze until I've realized it is not nature but (the?) Nature
- astine 13y agoRight, Nature, the scientific journal. The way it's worded, I thought this was going to be some kind of proof that Krebs was incorrect.
- twic 13y agoFull marks for the commenter who wrote: "I would love to get a 'rejection' letter from Nature that says that they would publish my paper with a delay of a few weeks." The context there is that these days, it takes months and months for a paper to be published in any journal!
- _delirium 13y agoI also liked: This was the first time in my career, after having published more than fifty papers, that I experienced a rejection or semi-rejection Partly that's because such submissions were indeed seen as letters or correspondence, to be lightly vetted for topicality and sanity and then published, vs. the current situation where 80-95% of submissions are rejected.
- andrewljohnson 13y agoThe comments on that page really flew off the rail. I think there is a troll loose.
- rocky1138 13y agoIt was very nice of them to send his submission back to him with the understanding he may wish to submit it to competing journals. In my opinion, this doesn't paint Nature in any bad light other than being overloaded at the then current time.