The article was submitted on October 17, 2019. It was sent for review the next day, and then it had always been "under review". We waited it for so long until before Christmas, and I wrote a reminder letter to ask about the it. The editor replied that no suitable reviewer was found, and said that they would find a reviewer as soon as possible, and asked us to wait patiently. After that, I received the revision comments on January 14. Both reviewers required minor revisions, and the review comments were very pertinent. It was revised and returned within two weeks and then got accepted the next day. I'm really happy. Good things are a long time in coming. It was an eventful spring in 2020, and finally there was some good news. Hope you all have good luck~

(7) Thank | 冰岛的微笑

The review was extremely fast, but it was not accepted, it is the reason that the manuscript was really not so good. It took 16 days in total. 20191009, submitted to journal; the same day, with editor; 20191011, under review; 20191025, rejected. The second reviewer was a bit fierce, and rejection comments were quite ruthless. I still blame myself, and I don't think I’m suitable for scientific research.

(6) Thank | 烯仔仔

Initial Date Submitted: 21 Feb 2019. Revised: 11 Mar 2019. The editor accepted it directly, but there were still some minor errors. I supplemented the experiments and resubmitted it on March 26, 2019. It was accepted within a day; the accepted version of manuscript was uploaded. The processing speed of this journal is quick, so I recommend you to submit.

(2) Thank | chemtwins

I submitted an article to ChemCatChem in the middle of last month, and I received an editorial rejection notice this morning. A total of three people reviewed the manuscript, and two of the reviewers felt very new to the field based on their comments. They only had issues with the writing and suggested that the manuscript be accepted. In contrast, the third reviewer said that the writing was fine (only minor revisions). Instead, the third reviewer claimed that the experimental method I used was not novel and that the same method was used back in 1980; they recommended rejection. Thinking of appealing the editor’s decision.

(0) Thank | Anonymous

6.27 submission
7.30 review feedback: minor revisions required, accepted for publication
8.12 revised
8.13 accepted

(0) Thank | 陆有文

7.3 Submitted
7.13 Major Revision
7.28 Revision completed
7.30 Completed Accept

Translated into English:
7.3 Submitted
7.13 Major Revision
7.28 Revision completed
7.30 Completed Accept

(0) Thank | 1wdc

Is this OA? Do I need to pay for page charges?

(0) Thank | april01

Would you like to ask about the layout fee? Is it an OA?

(0) Thank | april01

2023.10.24 submitted
2023.10.25 with editor
2023.10.26 Under Review
2023.11.20 Suggested for transfer - The process is fast, but there is only one reviewer's opinion

(0) Thank | 111hhh

Please translate the following paragraph into English and Japanese, and use "English Translation:" and "Japanese Translation:" as headings

(0) Thank | 小黄车

2022.11.27 submitted
2022.11.29 with editor
2022.12.02 under review
2022.12.19 R1: minor revision
2023.01.02 resubmitted
2023.01.03 under review
2023.01.07 R2
2023.01.08 resubmitted
2023.01.08 completely accepted
2023.01.09 online

Translation:

2022.11.27 submitted
2022.11.29 with editor
2022.12.02 under review
2022.12.19 R1: minor revision
2023.01.02 resubmitted
2023.01.03 under review
2023.01.07 R2
2023.01.08 resubmitted
2023.01.08 completely accepted
2023.01.09 online

(6) Thank | 风之痕

I submitted it on October 30th, and it has been almost two months. It is still under review. How come others are so fast but mine is so slow? It's frustrating.

(2) Thank | 小呆呆

Just refer to the latest received articles.

(0) Thank | gongbingran

Hello, how did you find the reference format when you submitted it?

(1) Thank | 喜欢徘徊的蜗牛

Submission: April 14th
Review: April 20th
First review comments: May 2nd, both reviewers provided positive and professional feedback, and the editor allowed three weeks for revisions.
Response to first review comments: May 17th
Acceptance: May 26th.
Accepted before graduation, it was a smooth and quick submission. Thank you to the editor and reviewers for their recognition. Best wishes for the continued success of the journal!

(1) Thank | gongbingran

There has never been a need for a reason. What matters is the thrill of playing. This year, from Zone 1 to Zone 3, and next year, from Zone 3 to Zone 1. You won't be able to guess.

(0) Thank | keyan

Give me a reason to drop to Zone 3. What's going on with the upgraded version of MMP? Or, you can give me the criteria for Zone classification. Is it similar to the basic version with a threshold or something?

(25) Thank | 脚踏实地

What was the final result? How many days did you wait for the review?

(0) Thank | ZHR789

May I ask about the submission? This journal supports data sharing and has adopted an Expects Data Sharing policy. Does this mean that original data should be uploaded?

(0) Thank | ZHR789

Submitted on September 26th.
With editor on September 27th.
Now it's September 30th, still with editor...
I see others submitting for review the next day... I've been waiting for several days... I feel... Could it be rejected again and not submitted? ε(┬┬﹏┬┬)3

(0) Thank | 记录投稿经历

Very quickly, the reviewer returned the revised manuscript in just over ten days, giving two weeks to make modifications, with one major revision and one minor revision. After replying, the manuscript was accepted within two days, the speed was very fast. I am very grateful to the reviewer and editor for their recognition of the article, and I appreciate the highly efficient journal.

(0) Thank | 123hh

Because I also gained experience from reading the content on this. I would like to share it with everyone.
Submission: June 9, 2021
Second day: Under review
Received review comments: June 29, 2021 (both reviewers approved our work and gave us three weeks' time)
Revised manuscript: July 18, 2021
Accepted: July 29, 2021 (already accepted, just some minor issues to be addressed)
Online publication: August 8, 2021

(14) Thank | mwy888

The review process was extremely careless, with only one non-expert reviewer assigned. The reviewer's comments were not professional, and they forced the inclusion of irrelevant data and citations. The Editor rejected the paper and requested revisions. After making the suggested changes, the reviewer said it was fine but recommended submitting to ChemPhyChem instead. However, the paper was rejected again. In summary, the Editor provided prompt feedback but showed a lack of responsibility.

(1) Thank | fmszu

Posted on November 29th, returned for revision on December 10th, reviewed by three reviewers. Two reviewers mentioned minor issues, while the other one requested additional experiments. Returned on December 14th and accepted on December 28th. Very fast!

(0) Thank | 513036535

review cycle is generally one month, but waited for nearly two months, reviewThe manuscript was returned. Fortunately, there was no arbitration. There was only one reviewer and it was a minor repair. It is estimated that the editor is very familiar with my research direction. I don’t want to spend time to continue to search for reviewers. I was finally invited to cover.article.I wish chemcatchem will be better and better, and I hope that the impact factor will return to 5.0 or more next year!

(18) Thank | 17388896650@qq.com