Submitted for 9 months, went through two rounds of revisions, the reviewers agreed to accept it, but the editor rejected it, saying it did not fit within the scope of the journal's submissions.

(0) 讚！ | 魂守1983

The lightning protection JPS journal 
was submitted to the journal in October 25 years ago (related to supercapacitors);
The first review was sent to three reviewers, two minor revisions and one rejection (the rejection is probably related to ion batteries, the reviewer suggested changing all capacity units to battery terms), the editor requested major revisions;
In the second review, two accepted and one major revision, the editor requested major revisions;
After revisions, the reviewers did not respond, the status changed to rrc, and half a month later, the editor rejected the submission;
In the email, the editor suggested submitting to the new OA journals Next Energy/Next Materials/Next Research. The email included the sentence "I have further reviewed your submission and I am pleased to offer a conditional acceptance of your manuscript".
By April 15, 2026, it is urgent for graduating students to carefully consider where to submit.

(0) 讚！ | 一拳一个嘤嘤怪

The school we attend has issued search certificates this year, what zone is the Journal of Power Source in? Our school does not have specific zones, they said we have to wait for further notice...

(0) 讚！ | dddyyy

I also submitted to this one before, but now I have been submitting all my electrochemistry-related papers to EA, which is now in the top tier of EA zone 2. This journal is not even in the top tier. JPS used to be a good journal, but it is disappointing to see it being managed by a group of editors like this.

(0) 讚！ | xushusheng51

Shrikant S Kawale is a foreigner, all crows are black, and it seems that he started doing this in order to drive traffic to the new journal from a certain time this year, purely for CS.

(0) 讚！ | zjmaizz

Submitted on November 2, 2025
Scheduled for major revision on March 3, 2026
No feedback yet, ddl March 23, 2026
Outcome unknown

(0) 讚！ | lixiaoxi

Just guessed that it's definitely not the first time doing this, very excessive, complaining is useless, and the chief editor's apology has no practical effect. Is Zhang your last name, editor?

(0) 讚！ | 拉风的猪

This kind of journal, edited by inexperienced individuals, has no bottom line when it comes to attracting traffic for the new issue. They even dare to engage in academic activities, not even deserving to be called human. It's a pity for us graduate students who have worked so hard. I suggest everyone not to submit to this journal, really, there must be a reason why it has fallen to the third tier.

(0) 讚！ | zjmaizz

Brother, I also encountered this issue. The external review resulted in one major revision and one minor revision, with a total of 7 suggested changes, none of which were negative. In fact, one of the reviewers even stated in their final comments that the paper could be accepted with the suggested revisions. However, the editor directly rejected it, stating that it did not fit within the scope of the journal and suggested submitting it to Next Research for consideration after revisions.

(0) 讚！ | zjmaizz

By the way, how can I file a complaint against the editor to Esquire?

(0) 讚！ | 拉风的猪

The journal is currently managed by In-house Scientific Editors who are responsible for the entire process of handling submissions. Our specific experience was as follows:
First round of review: The result was 2 major revisions and 1 minor revision, with relatively positive feedback from the reviewers. It took a month to carefully revise the manuscript, and we submitted a response letter of over 30 pages.
Second round of review: All 3 reviewers recommended "direct acceptance".
Editor's decision: A surprising turn of events - the handling editor, after receiving unanimous acceptance opinions, decided to reject the manuscript citing that it was not within the scope of the journal, and strongly recommended submitting to the new OA journals under the publisher Elsevier (Next Energy / Next Research).
Appeal and response: We appealed to the editor (pointing out that the evaluation of scope should have been done before the review process), but the editor replied by saying that "as long as there are no scientific issues, it will be reviewed", which completely goes against basic academic publishing ethics. We then applied for arbitration with the editor-in-chief, but to no avail.
[Advice to peers]:
The editor was extremely irresponsible, using peer review to polish manuscripts for free, and ultimately rejecting them with extremely weak reasons in order to redirect submissions to a new journal. This wasted the time of the authors and the three reviewers for several months. We suggest that colleagues consider these procedural issues, the high sunk time costs, and the possibility of "journal transfers" before submitting to JPS.

(1) 讚！ | 拉风的猪

Are you going to be promoted to a higher district this year?

(0) 讚！ | 科研小菜鸡儿

Have you been hired?

(0) 讚！ | 飞.

2026.1.24DIP translated to English is "January 24, 2026 DIP"

(0) 讚！ | 袁鑫

1. The 1.18 RRC has been changed to UR without adding any new reviewers. Does anyone know what's going on? Please advise.

(0) 讚！ | 袁鑫

How long does it usually take for STJ to be published? It feels a bit slow.

(0) 讚！ | 止水彡

1.14 Required Reviews Complete.

(0) 讚！ | 袁鑫

2026.1.6 Reviewer 1 responds.

(0) 讚！ | 袁鑫

Invite 7 people, 2 people accepted, hoping for a better outcome.

(0) 讚！ | 袁鑫

Submission on December 27, 2025
External review on January 3, 2026

(0) 讚！ | 袁鑫

Please supplement the review process:
9.29 major revise
10.14 WE
10.21 UR
11.3 RRC editor invited two new reviewers
11.29 Two accepted, one raised a minor issue, the other seemed like AI
12.4 WE
12.12 RRC
12.25 Accept
The editor is Rohan Chakrabarty, a very nice person, but indeed quite slow. He sent acceptance notices during Christmas and wished the editor a Merry Christmas.

(0) 讚！ | PLANET-

Submission on 20th December 2024
First review comments on 30th January
First review return on 20th February
Second review comments on 15th April
Second review return on 20th April
Third review comments on 15th May
Third review return on 17th May
Acceptance on 5th June
Overall quite slow, and the editing is not very responsible, also there are reviewers causing trouble.

(1) 讚！ | Jerry233

The first author and corresponding author on my end have confirmed, but I am not sure if the other authors have confirmed. The paper has been submitted for review now.

(0) 讚！ | cccccq

10.11 submitted
10.13 resubmitted
10.15 with editor
10.20 Under Review
10.22 0-2-4
10.28 1-2-4
11.1 2-2-4
11.1 Required Reviews Completed
11.3 Revise (major revision)
11.10 with editor
11.23 Under Review
11.24 0-0-2
11.25 1-2-2
12.4 2-2-2
12.4 Required Reviews Completed
12.6 accept

(0) 讚！ | jiayi m

Hello, how was it finally handled? Is confirmation required? I did not receive a confirmation email.

(0) 讚！ | wangguisong