Read on Twitter
Advice thread from #USIH #USIH2021 on publishing: 1. from Angus Burgin ( @MIHJournal): GOOD WRITING MAKES A DIFFERENCE. Reviewers can give feedback on arguments, 2ndary literature, substantive ideas. But if the writing isn't there, it's a much harder bar to clear. https://twitter.com/miss_glory/status/1359294372957671426
2. from @MartinezMatsuda: follow publication guidelines closely. This should be encouraging! You don't need a fancy connection to reach out to an editor and get into the pipeline.
from @katemasur (Journal of the Civil War Era): Keep in mind your reviewers will probably be people you're referencing in your footnotes. Be sure you're portraying their views and ideas correctly. Polished footnotes make a big difference-- it shows respect and care.
(oops, dropped the numbering...my bad!)
4. Take time to process the feedback on an R&R. @MartinezMatsuda recalls a time she got 4 reviewers' feedback--2 pages single spaced each. It can be overwhelming. Reach out to the editor who can help you process and target revisions!
4. Take time to process the feedback on an R&R. @MartinezMatsuda recalls a time she got 4 reviewers' feedback--2 pages single spaced each. It can be overwhelming. Reach out to the editor who can help you process and target revisions!
5. @katemasur echoes how hard it can be to process feedback. "There's no shame in showing it to someone else!" Have a trusted peer, advisor, friend look over the reviews and get their advice.
@JoshuaPiker (W&M Quarterly) echoes communication w/ editorial team. Use the revision statement as a tool to have a convo w/ the readers to show what you are taking on board and what you aren't--and importantly, communicate that to the editors!
(oops, there go the numbers again)
@angusburgin: "You can only do so much, and we know that as editors. That's what these revision statements that you send to the editors are for." This isn't a *defensive* statement. It helps editors see the decisions you made and why.
@angusburgin: "You can only do so much, and we know that as editors. That's what these revision statements that you send to the editors are for." This isn't a *defensive* statement. It helps editors see the decisions you made and why.
Wherefore art thou, Reviewer #2? @JoshuaPiker says ask the editor for advice-- "I can tell you if this is a donkey" (heh) and how to recover productive advice.
Appreciate the slowness of this process in an age of rapid communication and transient information! Developing the argument, creating an intellectual community, engaging with the scholarship at length.
OO just remembered this one from earlier in the convo:
Your argument should be clear within the first 3-4 pages of your article!!!
Your argument should be clear within the first 3-4 pages of your article!!!
"Getting rejected doesn't mean you failed"- @JoshuaPiker If you got 5 detailed reviews from the WMQ, that's great.
