2020.07.11, submission; 2020.08.04, major revision (2 reviewers); 2020.08.12, revision submission; 2020.08.31, accepted; 2020.09.05, proof required; 2020.09.09, proof submission; 2020.09.18, published online. It is the first article accepted by Advanced Functional Materials in my life, and I am touched. Thanks to the research team. It took one month and a half from submission to acceptance. The review speed and reviewers were all very professional and efficient. I hope Advanced Functional Materials will get better and better. Good luck!

(34) Thank | 鸣丘

2019-12-4, submission; 2019-12-24, the comments of the reviewers were returned. There were three reviewers, two of them required minor revision, and the other one rejected it, who said it was lacking in innovation. The editor rejected the article; 2019-12-24, my boss refused to accept, appealed and argued; 2020-01-30, the editor replied; the appeal was successful and the status of the manuscript changed from rejection to major revision. 10 days was given for revision, and I was clearly told that it would be sent for review again; 2020-2-8, the revised manuscript was submitted, and the article was revised and the experiments were supplemented according to the reviewers’ requirements; 2020-2-20, accept. There was no need to revise any longer; 2020-3-6, proof; 2020-3-12, online. In general, if you think your article has a bright spot, you must dare to fight for it. I do research on interventional photodynamic therapy, and I hope you can quote it (DOI: 10.1002/adfm.201910084). Finally, I hope that COVID-19 pandemic will end soon.

(40) Thank | HJUN

I submitted it on November 28, 2018, and received review comments on January 2, 2019. There was one positive comment, suggesting minor revision, and there were 11 questions. One reviewer had an extremely bad attitude, saying that the reference electrode used was wrong, and the mercury oxide reference electrode should be used. It was recommended to reject the manuscript. The editor required to make a major revision. I submitted the revision on January 14. I revised each reviewer’s comments, and re-tested a set of data using the mercury oxide reference electrode according to the review comments of the second reviewer who suggested rejection. I received the result of second review on January 19, the first reviewer who required minor revision, thought that there were no problems and it can be published. The second reviewer said that I didn’t answer his questions and still suggested rejecting the manuscript. The editor still suggested making a major revision. I submitted the revision according to the comments of the second review, and told the editor that we had retested in accordance with the requirements of the second reviewer, but he believed that we did not answer his questions. I received the result of the third review on February 11, and sent it to arbitration. The third reviewer thought it was innovative and suggested a minor revision. He asked a very simple question and the editor gave a minor revision. I submitted it on February 12 according to the third review comments. It was accepted on February 13. It was proofed on February 17 and online on February 25. The editor was good. I didn’t know if what the second reviewer did was overlapped with ours, or he had a grudge against us. But I felt that he did not review the manuscript properly. There were many grammatical mistakes in the review comments, he had no idea that the first letter should be capitalized, and his review comment format was not normal.

(27) Thank | nana小能手

I received review comments two weeks after submission. Two reviewers asked for minor revision but the third suggested the work was too similar to that of others, so the editor rejected the manuscript. My instructor suggested that I appeal the decision. I added data and submitted my appeal letter. The editors changed the rejection to a major revision recommendation. After submitting the revised version and undergoing review again, the manuscript was accepted. In general, AFM's review speed is still very fast. My experience is that if you feel that the work is really good, you can directly argue for it, but you should seriously reply to the reviewers’ opinions.

(12) Thank | emon

Does anyone know if original data is required for submitting a paper to AFM? What format should it be in? Any insights would be appreciated.

(0) Thank | zy09

I have also been submitting for 25 days, always with dog-editor.

(0) Thank | 让我发个大子刊吧

How many days does it take for the editor to submit for review?

(0) Thank | dawang

Hey friend, I wanted to ask about the submission. It's been a few days and there hasn't been any progress. Can you please let me know what's going on?

(0) Thank | wiiq

Friend, how are you doing now? I am still in the submit status.

(0) Thank | wiiq

The submissions in January were very fast, but the second review is now very slow.

(0) Thank | MS.Z

At the beginning of January, the submission and review process was very fast, but the second round of review was slow.

(0) Thank | MS.Z

2025.4.3 Submission of Response with AM
2025.4.8 Under review
2025.4.14 Minor Revision
2025.4.15 Acceptance

(0) Thank | gaoyu123

Submit manuscript by April 2025.

(0) Thank | gy0527

It's been almost two and a half months, and the review is still ongoing at a very slow pace. I'm afraid of getting rejected, not to mention wasting a lot of time for the child. This review speed is really delaying graduation.

(0) Thank | hewenfeng

25/1/21 submit
25/1/22 with Editor
25/1/22 Under Review
25/3/30 Required Reviews Completed
25/3/31 Reject

(0) Thank | 蜡笔小陈

How did the original poster fare afterwards?

(0) Thank | xiyou2019

Have you received any updates? I submitted on 3.21 and it's still with the editor. I'm so worried.

(0) Thank | xiyou2019

Have you seen any results yet? I see everyone else is submitting for review on the same day or the next day. My item has been with the editor for 4 days now. I'm starting to get a little worried.

(0) Thank | xiyou2019

Is the OP's research direction medicine? Why has my submission been in "With Editor" status for 20 days and still not been reviewed? So frustrated.

(0) Thank | mimy2025

May I ask, what is the current status of your submission? It has been 20 days since I submitted mine and it is still in "With Editor". I am getting worried...

(0) Thank | mimy2025

Please submit by 3/17/2025.

(0) Thank | zf

These fucking stupid reviewers and editors keep dragging their feet, really dumb.

(0) Thank | dedededededede

Oh no,
There was no change in the status from 2.15 to 3.16, it has always been UR. The status linked to WeChat has been updated twice, still UR. What does this update at this time mean?

(0) Thank | dedededededede

What does it mean when a Wiley journal status changes to "Under Review" once? Does it signify a change in reviewers or the return of reviewer comments?

(0) Thank | Alpenglow

2024.12.18 submit
2024.12.19 With Editor
2024.12.20 Under Review
2024.12.30 Under Review
2025.01.08 Under Review
2025.01.21 Under Review
2025.02.16 Under Review
2025.02.25 Major Revision（5%+15%）
2025.03.08 Revised
2025.03.09 Accept

(0) Thank | 老夫聊发少年狂