别人家的论文评审意见

　　别人家的论文评审意见。来源：
审稿人什么的最令人讨厌了！花费数以周记甚至数以月计的时间，终于把论文写到自己觉得完美无缺，满怀希望把论文投递出去。你心想发表论文的过程肯定会非常轻松，仿佛看到自己的论文印成铅字在你眼前，别做梦了！
审稿人会让你感到甚至想的，当然，如果他们心情好的话，可能只需要你回到电脑前做一下修改。说真的，审稿人提出的那些无关紧要，毫无意义的问题和评论到底有什么用？
审稿人跟你的沟通要么热情诚恳，要么其事，但是审稿人与期刊编辑之间的沟通就随意多了。你知道审稿人在背着你说你的哪些吗？请往下看。
2010年Environmental Microbiology刊登了一部分的审稿意见，让人在学术研究严肃、认真的前提下充分体会了下，审稿人的幽默与诙谐，有的审稿意见甚至让人啼笑皆非，下面列举了一部分经典的审稿意见，让大家也见识一下史上最狠的评审意见，其他的内容见文后附件，有兴趣的可以继续寻找。
PS：翻译纯属搞笑，不喜勿拍！


毒舌搞笑篇：


This paper is desperate. Please reject it completely and then block the author’s email ID so they can’t use the online system in future.
这文章太不给力了…请万勿发表。此外，锁定该作者的电子邮件ID，避免此人日后继续。。

The writing and data presentation are so bad that I had to leave work and go home early and then spend time to wonder what life is about.
写作水平和展示的数据无敌了，哥不得不提前下班，匆匆回家，然后花时间思考下人活着是为了虾米。。。

Reject – More holes than my grandad’s string vest!
拒发，必须的。本文的漏洞比我爷爷网眼背心上的洞还多！

I would suggest that EM set up a fund that pays for the red wine reviewers may need to digest manuscripts like this one.
哥贵刊（微生物学）成立基金，以买单审稿人审阅时可能需要的红酒，哥上火呀。

The biggest problem with this manuscript, which has nearly sucked the will to live out of me, is the terrible writing style.
这篇文章问题多多，写作格式尤其，简直了哥身体里的意志。

Hopeless – Seems like they have been asleep and are not up on recent work on metagenomics.
哥真的不能淡定了。显然作者要么睡着了，要么完全没跟上宏基因组学的前沿发展。

A weak paper, poor experimental design, comparison of sequences using different primers, no statistical analysis possible, carelessly written, poorly thought through.
文章很弱。实验设计很锉，使用不同的引物序列比较；统计分析不置可否；写作粗犷。的悲剧呀。。。

I agreed to review this Ms whilst answering e-mails in the golden glow of a balmy evening on the terrace of our holiday hotel on Lake Como. Back in the harsh light of reality in Belfast I realize that it’s just on the limit of my comfort zone and that it would probably have been better not to have volunteered.
迷人的傍晚，金色的夕照，如果此时哥在科莫湖的假日酒店那铺洒着余辉的露台上，我会欣然同意审阅这篇文章。然而，在贝尔法斯特的日光里，我想刚才我那么想是被酒店啥的爽到了，文章么，咱能不提这事行吗。。。

The presentation is of a standard that I would reject from an undergraduate student.
哥从本科开始就不看这种操性的文章了。

The lack of negative controls. . . . results in the authors being lost in the funhouse. Unfortunately, I do not think they even realize this.
阴性对照实验的缺乏导致作者在游乐场里完全迷失了，不幸的是，我看他们现在还没意识到。

"Season’s Greetings! I apologise for my slow response but a roast goose prevented me from answering emails for a few days."
节日快乐！回复慢了，真抱歉。有一只烤鹅妨碍我，让我几天都没顾得上回邮件。

"This paper is awfully written. There is no adequate objective and no reasonable conclusion. The literature is quoted at random and not in the context of argument. I have doubts about the methods and whether the effort of data gathering is sufficient to arrive at a useful conclusion."
这篇论文写得太烂了。目的不明确，结论不合理。引文都是乱引的，跟正文的论证完全对不上号。我怀疑这样的实验方法，也怀疑他们收集的数据不足以得出有效结论。


见识过了审稿人的毒舌和幽默，再来见识一下审稿人怎么夸人。但当审稿人遇到非常棒的论文，也会给出衷心的好评。


好评点赞篇：

“Very much enjoyed reading this one, and do not have any significant comments. Wish I had thought of this one.”
这篇论文读起来简直是一种享受，没有任何意见。这么好的点子我当初怎么没想到！
“There was little I could think of to improve this nice paper.”
这篇论文好得我都不知道要怎么改了。
"This is as solid a write up as I have seen, many spend much more time and space to say considerably less. It is a perfect example of a compact report."
这是我见过的最确凿的报告，许多人花更多时间精力写出来的比这个差多了。作为一篇翔实的报告，这是一个完美的例子。
"landmark paper on P. putida physiology."
假单胞菌生理学研究的里程碑
"It is always a joy to review manuscripts such as this. Well conceived, well executed, well edited. Clean. Pristine. From start to finish."
评审这样的是件人生乐事：构思周详，实施得当，写得漂亮。干净，，从头至尾。
以上审稿意见摘自于Referees‘ quotes - 2010. (2010) Environmental Microbiology，还有更多，理文编辑收集了2001年至2011年的每期内容，读起来完全停不下来，越读越上瘾。


===有问必答===
2楼2017-04-20 11:58:32
----
呵呵,我也收到过类似于第的意见,不过比这恶心多了,他说我论文里漏洞比他身上的虱子还多一些.人,人长得也很猥琐.不过后来,那篇论文几经周折,还是发表了.学生时代实在太草率了.如今写论文推导和措辞小心多了.