你见过最狠的SCI评论是什么?

good

你在SCI投稿时，遇到最狠的编辑评论是什么

原文地址：https://www.zhihu.com/question/430036342

感恩由您

我老板说他有一篇文章落到了竞争对手手里，对方还是美国科学院院士，意见是：这篇文章如果发表，将使物理化学倒退30年。
然后我老板就一口气引用了10篇他的文章，他就把我老板一顿猛夸，说这文章很值得发表。

感恩由您

最近刚把一篇水文章投到了一本水刊，收到某reviewer的友善评论：
“I read this paper several times but do not understand it. I cannot comment on the paper. It makes no sense. ”
（我读了几遍但没看懂。我无法评论这篇文章。它毫无意义。）

清风寡欲

作者是四个医生土生土长美国人，四人皆为藤校毕业医学博士 论文审稿人意见：“你们应该找一个英语为母语的人执笔。”

大力水手

1.The results are as weak as wet noodles.（结论跟湿面条一样软弱无力）
2.The authors are amateur.（作者怕不是个兼职的）
3.It is a bit for me that authors have used Python statistical analysis instead of SPSS or Matlab as usual.Please,explain.（本文用了Python而不是像通常用SPSS和Matlab处理数据，为啥）
4.Did you have seizure while writing this sentence?Because I fell like I had one while reading it.（你写文章的时候犯癫痫了吗？反正我觉得我读的时候犯了）
5.Why chase a gene in this ridiculous organism?（为什么在这种荒诞的生物里追求一个基因）
6.This paper introduce tools to answer questions which it does not seem many people are interested in.（本文介绍了些解决问题的工具，然而人们并不感兴趣）
7.The English language ranks this manuscript among the top 5 worst manuscripts I have ever reviewed.（这篇文章的英语水平可以排进我看过的最烂的前五）
8.I started reading this manuscript with much anticipation.But my enthusiasm was short lived.（我满怀期待读这篇文章，但热情很短）
9.I have rarely a more blown-up and annoy paper in the last couple of years than this hot-air balloon manuscript.（我过去几年都没读过这篇像屁一样烦人的文章）
10.Figure3.This figure is silly.（这图好蠢呐）
11.This paper makes no contribution.（这文章有锤子贡献）
12.But now, there are over 1000 articles on this topic. But this author have not read a single.（这个方向至少有一千篇文章，作者没读过一篇）
更一下
13.Reject-More holes than my grandads' string vest.（拒了，漏洞比我爷爷的背心上的网眼还多）
14.The biggest problem with manuscript, which has nearly sucked the will to live out of me, is the terrible writing style.（这篇稿子审得我都想自挂东南枝了）
15.This paper is desperate. Please reject it complete and then block The author's email ID so they can't use The online system future.（文章太差了，麻烦封掉作者的账号以免他以后再投稿）
16.The writing and data presentation are so bad that I had to leave and go home early and then spend time to wonder what life is about.（手稿和数据显示让我整个人都不好了，不得不提前下班，开始怀疑人生）
17.The presentation is of a standard that I would reject from an undergraduate student.(就算回到本科时期，我也会拒掉这种文章)
再更一下


18.It's hard for me to understand why it takes 5 authors to perform and describe one simple experiment.（我很难理解为啥需要5个作者来阐述这么简单的一个问题）
19.This was a possible candidate for me the 'worst use of statistics to substantiate and falsehood' award.（这篇文章可以竞选一下瞎鸡儿统计学得出错误结论奖）
20.If I had known this would be such an easy one to review(reject!), I would have done it earlier instead of waiting for my dog to have a baby.（拒了，早晓得审稿如此简单，我就该早做了而不是等我狗生完）
再更一下，回复审稿意见的模板

检验医师

“This paper is, simply manure"
"What the authors have done is an insult to science"
还有一条更让人崩溃的是：
"You should look closely at a career outside of science"
这是直接劝作者退出学术圈了啊……
所以，想想如果你平时投稿时只是收到一些普通的拒稿邮件，哪怕就文章内容批评几句，已经是多么幸运的事！
然而……
还有大量更毒的审稿意见，有些时候连审稿人自己都被“ 毒”到了，以下是 从2001年至2011年，《Environmental Microbiology》每年都会发布一些审稿意见集锦中收集的
毒舌搞笑篇：
1. Reject – More holes than my grandad’s string vest!
拒发。漏洞比我爷爷的网眼背心上的网眼还多！
2. "Done! Difficult task, I don’t wish to think about constipation and faecal flora during my holidays! But, once a referee, always and anywhere a referee; we are good boy scouts in the research wilderness. Even under the sun and near a wonderful beach."
搞定了！太不容易了。我才不想装着一脑子便秘和粪便菌落来度假。但是，一朝做了审稿人，永远都是审稿人，到哪儿都是审稿人。在科学研究的荒漠中，我们是勇敢的童子军。即使在洒满阳光的沙滩上也是。哼！
3. "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."
这篇论文烂到家了。请彻底拒稿，然后封了作者的账号，免得他日后继续投稿。
4. "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."
写作水平和数据展示让我整个人都不好了，我不得不提前下班，早点回家，甚至开始怀疑人生。
5. "The biggest problem with this manu, which has nearly sucked the will to live out of me, is the terrible writing style."
这篇稿件的写作风格太糟糕了，审得我都不想活了。
6. "The presentation is of a standard that I would reject from an undergraduate student."
就算回到本科生时期，我都会拒掉这种水平的投稿。
7. "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。
8. "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。
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。
好吧，为了鼓励大家继续好好写论文投论文，我们最后还是放些点赞的审稿意见吧
1. “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！
2. “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。
3. "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。
4. "landmark paper on P. putida physiology."
假单胞菌生理学研究的里程碑
5. "It is always a joy to review manus such as this. Well conceived, well executed, well edited. Clean. Pristine. From start to finish."
评审这样的稿件是件人生乐事：构思周详，实施得当，写得漂亮。干净，纯朴，从头至尾。