博文
写文章、改文章
||
很久没有写博文的感觉，干脆就乱写一气了。刚给一个博士后写的信，掐头去尾的拷上来，交差。
Thank you for sending me back the revision so fast. I added more
comments, many of which editorial. I would suggest you considering to
rewrite the literature review if possible. Can we do it by subjects, e.g.,
performance, theory, numerical methodology, experimental investigations,
and industrial applications of TLDs and ATLDs? Writing is for readers, not
for the authors. If you just provide a plain description of what other
people have done in the chronological order, why don't you just list the
references and let the readers to judge? In addition, there are a few
papers (e.g., Tait (2008) and Sun et al. (1995)) that deserve a more detailed
review.
I wish you would reconsider my previous suggestion of adding a small
section to discuss or review those key performance parameters of a TLD. I
knew that Tait (2008) already had done so. But as long as it helps the
flow of the writing and reading, we should do so. With that, we can also
avoid to review other peoples results even in 'results and discussion'
section.
At the meantime, we need to think over what major contributions this study
has made. This will help to make this paper stronger and more readable.
https://blog.sciencenet.cn/blog-103568-503885.html
上一篇：异国拆迁的故事
下一篇：光秃秃的树丫与吴老师的飞机
Thank you for sending me back the revision so fast. I added more
comments, many of which editorial. I would suggest you considering to
rewrite the literature review if possible. Can we do it by subjects, e.g.,
performance, theory, numerical methodology, experimental investigations,
and industrial applications of TLDs and ATLDs? Writing is for readers, not
for the authors. If you just provide a plain description of what other
people have done in the chronological order, why don't you just list the
references and let the readers to judge? In addition, there are a few
papers (e.g., Tait (2008) and Sun et al. (1995)) that deserve a more detailed
review.
I wish you would reconsider my previous suggestion of adding a small
section to discuss or review those key performance parameters of a TLD. I
knew that Tait (2008) already had done so. But as long as it helps the
flow of the writing and reading, we should do so. With that, we can also
avoid to review other peoples results even in 'results and discussion'
section.
At the meantime, we need to think over what major contributions this study
has made. This will help to make this paper stronger and more readable.
https://blog.sciencenet.cn/blog-103568-503885.html
上一篇：异国拆迁的故事
下一篇：光秃秃的树丫与吴老师的飞机
扫一扫，分享此博文
全部作者的精选博文
全部作者的其他最新博文
全部精选博文导读
相关博文
- • 700年后日本或濒临灭绝？日本学者推算预测：届时或仅剩1名15岁以下孩子
- • [转载]【同位素视角】非英语母语学者如何区分’e.g.’, ‘i.e.’, ‘namely’与‘such as’等混淆难题
- • 美国佐治亚大学等机构学者：刈割策略对Bulldog 805紫花苜蓿+Tifton 85狗牙根混播草地产量及品质的影响
- • 美国堪萨斯州立大学、密苏里大学等机构学者研究成果：土壤水分管理策略和品种多样性对紫花苜蓿产量、营养品质和农场盈利能力的影
- • 德国、捷克草业科学学者长期放牧实验：异质草地斑块中的土壤有机碳储量和地下生物量
- • 如何才能连续被评为十年“中国高被引学者”？——对话上海大学王卿文教授