Re: Google SCHOLAR!

From: Joshua Halpern (vze23qvd_at_verizon.net)
Date: 12/16/04 

Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 02:15:53 GMT

Uncle Al wrote:
> Richard Schultz wrote:
>
>>In article <41BF3E84.25E8F607@hate.spam.net>, Uncle Al <UncleAl0@hate.spam.net> wrote:
>>
>>: An edited version of qz.pdf, below, was accepted for publication
>>: pending Referee review.
>>
>>What is *that* supposed to mean? In the real world, one submits a paper
>>to a journal (note that the journal to which the paper was submitted is
>>not actually named anywhere). The editor then sends the manuscript to
>>referees for review, and decides whether or not to publish it (or to
>>publish it after revision) based on the recommendation of the referees.
>>
>>If it has not yet been reviewed, then it is not "accepted for publication"
>>if it was actually sent to a refereed journal. Unless your preprint
>>*is* the revised version, although it's generally considered proper practice
>>to alert people of that fact.
>
> [snip further critic troll crap]
>
> Gee, Schultz, weren't you the one who said it would never be accepted
> by a journal for consideration?

Try publication. They take all submissions for consideration. Even AP
could get through that step.

> You posted a big long rambling e-mail
> punctiliously detailing all its shortcomings.
>
> 1) Schwartz never answers my critic troll ravings!
> 2) Schwartz has no right to answer my critic troll ravings!
> 3) When Uncle Al smells lutafisk on 10 December 2007, he'll think
> of you, Schultz.
>
>
>>Dear Dr. Schwartz,
>>
>>The editors acknowledge receipt of the above manuscript on [snip] 2004
>>and are considering it for possible publication as a regular article
>>in [snip].
>
They are going to review it. Depending on the journal they may or may
not send it out for external review.
>
> The e-mail then proceeds with Referee and other stuff. Pookie pookie
> critic troll Schultz.

Which is what RS said. pokie.

Depending on the journal you will hear in 4-8 weeks. maybe.

josh halpern

Quantcast