Excuse me, but I can't see the place to upload the revised manuscript after receiving the feedback from this journal. There is only a stable upload option for replying to the reviewer's comments. Can someone please help me?

(0) 讚！ | ASDFASDFSADF

Seeking answers from the experts!

(0) 讚！ | 辉哥

My paper was accepted in October 2021. I have inquired with the journal editors several times, and they have always said that the paper is still being processed and produced. However, I have not received any proof or online publication yet. I don't know what's going on. I seek guidance from all the experts!

(0) 讚！ | 辉哥

Our journal is good.

(3) 讚！ | SCI确实容易呵

The first SCI paper in my life, both the reviewers and the editors were very patient and had a high level of expertise, which greatly improved the quality of the article. Although the journal's impact factor is not particularly high and it is open access (OA), it is suitable for someone like me who is new to scientific research and in a hurry to publish articles for graduation purposes. It is also relatively recognized in the field of geology. Recommended.

(2) 讚！ | 小王12106

Excuse me, is there a Word or PDF version of the format instructions for this journal?

(0) 讚！ | 987mumu

Submitted in November of the 21st year, rejected one month later, with the reason being two reviewers requesting revisions and one rejecting the manuscript. The article was then extensively revised based on the previous feedback. 
Resubmitted on March 2nd. 
Received reviewer comments on March 9th, requiring minor revisions, but there were a lot of suggestions, possibly reviewed by six reviewers because one of them was Reviewer 6. 
Returned for revisions on March 22nd, pending approval for two days. 
Received acceptance notification on March 24th. 
Both rounds of review were conducted promptly. The editor was also very responsible, responding quickly to inquiries, rejections, and acceptance.

(0) 讚！ | Averyzx666

I feel that the quality of this publication is higher than some third-tier journals. Some reviewers are very serious and their questions are also very pertinent. I estimate that it will be promoted to a third-tier journal next year.

(0) 讚！ | wuy

The time for publication is 5 months, and the time for returning the review results is less than 2 months.

(0) 讚！ | 阿拉灯神丁

The speed of receiving the first review comments was very fast, less than 40 days. However, after submitting the revised manuscript, a small problem was discovered, so it had to be re-reviewed, which delayed the process for about three months. The communication efficiency with the editor is still very high. I wish Geofluids continued success. 
Submission date: July 6th;
Review comments returned on August 13th, minor revisions, with 8 review comments;
Revised manuscript uploaded on August 17th, but the status remained as "Pending Approval" for 2 months;
Email sent on October 27th to inquire about the progress, and the editorial department replied that it was due to the reviewer's affiliation issue, so it was sent for another review;
Second set of review comments received on December 5th, still minor revisions;
Revised manuscript uploaded on December 12th;
Acceptance notice received on December 16th.

(0) 讚！ | 阿拉灯神丁

Bro, how long ago did you last assign an editor?

(0) 讚！ | 心里只有论文

I submitted a special issue, but it has been 19 days now and the editor has not been assigned yet. What could be the reason?

(0) 讚！ | 小小鱼

20200912 Submission special issue, 20200914 Initial review and revision, 20200919 Guest editor arranges for review, 20200923 Reviewer completes review, 20200925 Awaiting approval, 1011 Guest editor makes decision - revise and resubmit, 20201015 Revised manuscript assigned to AE, 20201019 Assigned to reviewer, 20201020 Reviewer suggests publication, 20201021 Awaiting approval, 20201026 Sent email inquiry, 20201030 Second reviewer contacted me and submitted review comments, 20201031 Acceptance notification, 20201031 Payment of 1650 USD, 20201101 Submission of final manuscript, 20201103 Accepted by publisher, 20201112 Submission of proof, 20201117 Published, 20201225 SCI indexed.

(8) 讚！ | 无道GG

2020.12.02, Submitted
2021.03.25, Received review comments
2021.04.22, Submitted revised paper
2021.05.04, Accepted
Currently, I have received the acceptance letter and look forward to the next steps. I just hope that it can be completed quickly. Although 5 months is not fast, I can still accept it.

(4) 讚！ | yyuuu

In about one month and a half, the result of first review was given and major revision was required. One week after submission, minor revision was required. Three days after resubmission, it was accepted. But the current problem is that after the submission of all the files, due to the update of the Hindawi’s submission system, all of the authors are in wrong order, and it is always unassigned shown in the column of associated editor. Is there anyone whose article is officially published through the new system can tell me what is going on?

(1) 讚！ | lkj997

It is a tragedy for me submitting to GEOFLUIDS! The speed of reviewing manuscripts is okay. There were two reviewers in the first review, which lasted for two months. Reviewer a gave quite detailed comments, but he was not optimistic about the article and wanted to reject it. In the submission system, reviewer b just gave some opinions on the article, but no specific comments, and required a major revision. After careful modification, it was returned. However, the result was shocking! The reviewer a thought that the correction was good and accepted it. At this time, the reviewer b uploaded the specific review comments that should be uploaded in the first round of review, and accused me of not making the revisions, and suggested rejecting the manuscript. Finally, the journal rejected the manuscript... The appeal letter was sent to explain the situation. In the end, the editorial office maintained the decision to reject the manuscript on the grounds that they could not interfere with the publisher's decision, and told me that I could resubmit the manuscript, but it will need to undergo the review process again...

(10) 讚！ | 大魔王007

10.29 Submit; 10.30 Authors' Data Needed; 10.30-12.6 Under Review; 12.6 Minor Revision Required; 12.27 Accept. It was relatively fast generally. There were only two reviewers for my manuscript, and the review comments given were not too tricky. One reviewer said that the grammar of the whole article needed to be revised, and the other reviewer asked three questions. The grammar issue was resolved by the polishing company. After the three questions were answered carefully, there was no problem. After submitting the revised manuscript, the editor directly accepted it. This was considered to be an article completed by myself during my master's degree. Of course, I should thank my senior apprentice for recommending this journal. But then again, article processing charges are indeed expensive.

(2) 讚！ | GEOgroundwater

Submitted on Oct. 10. Then there was some problem with the author information, so we had to repeatedly confirm the authors. The emails addresses must be correct. Review started on Nov. 06, and the initial review comments were back on Dec. 30. Minor revision requested, only a few comments. Revision submitted on Jan. 03. The editor had us verify that the manuscript was not submitted anywhere else on Jan. 08. Accepted on Jan. 09. Reminder: during submission you must have all the original figure files, either CDR or EPS, make sure you have all of them!

(5) 讚！ | 王大爷

The impact factor is moderate.The editor-in-chief is very efficient, the reviewer is serious and responsible, and the comments are also very pertinent. It is a good journal worthy of submission.

(2) 讚！ | Jasmine

is not generally bad after open source.The two articles that the boss selectd for were rejected. The select was actually received directly, with almost no changes, and received for 2 months.Really oh oh oh

(1) 讚！ | 呵呵哒

Reviewer has put forward a lot of opinions, the editor has high requirements, and finally refused to draft

(0) 讚！ | 追逐

open source does not mean that the quality of the journal is not good, the journal belongs to the field of ESI geoscience, the impact factor is moderate.The editor-in-chief is very efficient, and the reviewers' comments are also very pertinent. It is a good journal worthy of submission.

(0) 讚！ | EESSAA

Overview

(0) 讚！ | 匿名

Science Citation Index ExpandedTM (Thomson Reuters)

(0) 讚！ | 匿名