I have submitted two meteorological-related articles in two years, both of which were accepted after major revision and then minor revision. The first one: Initial date submitted: Oct 30 2018; Sep 11 2019, completed-accept. Five months after the submission of the first article, major revision was informed (two reviewers, one minor revision, one major revision). Three or four months after the review of the major revision, minor revision was informed (three reviewers in the third review, two minor revisions and one without any questions). It was accepted a month later. There were three reviewers who made many key suggestions. The article was revised greatly, and the method was changed as well. The second one: Initial date submitted: Mar 06 2019; Sep 15 2019, completed-accept. Three months after the submission of the second article, major revision was informed (two reviewers, one minor revision, one major revision). Two months after the review of major revision, minor revision was informed (two reviewers, two minor revisions). It was accepted a month later. There were three reviewers who made many key writing suggestions, which is helpful for improving the article. The two papers were published in the same issue of the same journal, with consecutive numbers. In short, the level of the reviewers is very high. The quality of the paper will be greatly improved after review.

(22) Thank | 胡一菲

Submitted on June 21, sent to the editor on June 22, and rejected on June 24. The opinions are as follows: and have decided that it is not suitable for our journal. Matching a paper to a journal is important because papers in the wrong journal will neither make the impact nor develop the science as they deserve to. I hope you agree that it is better to make a rapid editorial decision now, rather than delaying publication of your paper elsewhere by sending it out for a lengthy review.

(0) Thank | 至死不渝

Submitted on May 17th, and then under review on May 19th. On June 15th, I was told that it was not suitable for their journal. Shame on you! Not suitable for you? What on earth was it under review! It took me a long time! “and have decided that it is not suitable for our journal. Matching a paper to a journal is important because papers in the wrong journal will neither make the impact nor develop the science as they deserve to. I hope you agree that it is better to make a rapid editorial decision now, rather than delaying publication of your paper elsewhere by sending it out for a lengthy review. Ying-Ping Wang, PhD Editor-in-Chief”

(3) Thank | 天才少女

My colleagues and I submitted a paper about the study of urban heat island effects. Specifically, how we can cool hot-humid (Asian) cities with urban trees. We submitted our manuscript in April this year, and I got the first review in September. It was recommended for major revision, and we made all the edits according to the reviewer’s comments. After we returned our revised draft to the reviewers, they said that we basically answered their doubts. Overall, one reviewer had significant opinions while the other two reviewers only pointed out some small things Our manuscript was finally accepted on November 20th.The reviewer's opinions were very pertinent. In general, this process was neither efficient or super slow. Because the journal is very influential, it’s worth it wait a little bit longer.

(0) Thank | yzw子非鱼

May I ask if a new number will be generated or will the original number be used after resubmitting a rejected manuscript?

(0) Thank | yolanda

Seeking help: After the first revision, the paper was revised on April 13th. On the 21st, the editor invited a reviewer, but as of May 9th, that reviewer has not accepted the invitation. The editor has not sent out any new invitations during this time, and the results are urgently needed, causing significant anxiety. I would like to ask experienced professionals, in general, how much longer should we wait in this situation? Frustrated.

(0) Thank | 努力的蜗牛

The submission made on January 2, 2025 was under review on January 8. After continuously searching for reviewers, we finally found three reviewers who agreed to review the manuscript. After two reviewers completed their review, we were informed of the rejection on April 23. The process was very slow and lengthy, delaying the process by three months. Please be cautious and patient when submitting.

(0) Thank | 赵亚波

Recently, I got my fourth paper accepted by AFM. This is my first time delving into the field of global change using remote sensing data, as my previous three papers were based on fluxes. I must say, besides fluxes, the experts in the field of global change ecology at AFM are very professional. The second round of review involved adding a lot of other global products, studying both dynamics and trends. Now, the final version required a lot more work, and I feel a bit regretful for not trying GCB. However, I will continue to support AFM as always in the future, aiming to publish 1-2 papers like this every year.

(1) Thank | 火鸡味锅巴

It took over a year in total, and though I was selected, it was really difficult. Friends who are pressed for time should consider carefully. After three rounds of evaluation, I feel like I've shed a layer of skin and am currently receiving intravenous therapy in the hospital.

(1) Thank | Talon20

A very large amount of data was accepted for publication, going through a process of resubmission and three rounds of revisions. The peer review was very professional and rigorous, with many suggestions made regarding the usage and expression of specific professional vocabulary and concepts. The wording had to be very precise in order to pass the review, which posed a certain challenge for non-native English authors. However, usage issues with individual words would not affect the submission outcome, as the main focus is on the recognition of the research work. The journal has a good reputation, but its current level of influence seems to be slightly disappointing for the high standards and requirements of the editors and reviewers.

(0) Thank | 乡土

Is the review process fast?

(0) Thank | nini8983

It is an authoritative journal in the old professional field. It took nearly a year for the first attempt. The reviewers were indeed professional, giving us nearly 100 comments. The editor therefore gave us a rejection and resubmission. After burying our heads and revising for 4 months, we resubmitted and went through several rounds of revisions before finally being accepted. The journal is okay, but the value for money is really not high!

(1) Thank | who are you

Although they rejected me, the reviewing speed was excellent.

(0) Thank | 我也不太了解她

It is possible that the editor forgot to upload the attachment, just send an email to inquire. A few days ago, our research group also had a similar situation. We replied from the rework email, explained the situation, and the editor will resend the attachment.

(0) Thank | 学术小学生~

My review comments are in the form of an attachment, not in the email sent by the editor. However, there is no link to the attachment in the system, so I still cannot see the reviewers' comments. What should I do? 

Reviewers' comments:
%REVIEWER_ATTACH_DEEP_LINK%

(0) Thank | asistent

Submitted at the end of July 2024, currently undergoing major revisions, with overall feedback not exceeding 3 pages.

(0) Thank | kew

I have already written four reminder letters, but they are completely useless as none of the editors have responded. If there is no response by the beginning of next month, I plan to write directly to the editor-in-chief. Even if I am rejected, I will still express my anger!

(0) Thank | garyhzy0418

Please translate the following paragraph into English: None

(3) Thank | 王小辣

The submission made on January 21, 2014 is still under review. Twenty-two reviewers were invited, three accepted the review invitation, but only one provided feedback. Two reminders have been sent, both of which received official responses. Is there any solution to this situation?

(0) Thank | garyhzy0418

Having been rejected and resubmitted, it has been three months since the resubmission. In the past month, there have been no invitations from the reviewers on WeChat, and there have been no changes. Should I consider following up on the submission?

(0) Thank | 云一尺

It seems that the edited version was sent for external review on the first day after the changes were made, and the subsequent reviews were also quite fast.

(0) Thank | 努力的蜗牛

It has been submitted for review, and it will be returned for revisions within two months after the external review.

(0) Thank | 努力的蜗牛

Will all authors receive a confirmation email after submitting to this journal?

(0) Thank | Nicloe

My manuscript has been with the editor for a month, and it still hasn't been submitted for review. Looks like there's no hope.

(0) Thank | gwq9975

It has been a month with the editor, still no response. How about yours?

(0) Thank | gwq9975