Anales Galdosianos

You are here Home  > Journals >  Anales Galdosianos

Close Comments

Comments (14)

  1. They never even responded to my submission. After two years I had to withdraw it and send it elsewhere, wasting valuable time (though at it was accepted at the other journal). Very unprofessional.

  2. A great journal, in my experience. There are 3 reviewers who do a blind review of the article. Their comments are very detailed and in-depth.

    Anonymous: if you do not receive a confirmation of your subscription, it is possible that they never received it. It happened to me with another journal. So now if I submit an article and they do not send me a confirmation within a week, I write them an e-mail and ask them to confirm that they received it.

  3. Les mandé un artículo en julio del 2009. Me aseguraron de que me iban a dar una respuesta a finales de septiembre. Estamos a finales de marzo. Sigo esperando una respuesta.

  4. Clarissa,
    Just to clarify, I did attempt to contact the editor twice to verify whether my article had been received. I never received a response to either query.

  5. I had friend who had the same experience(no answer); but I sent something last summer and the editor got back to me quickly. I think the new editorial leadership is helping improve this journal, after its prestige in the 80s and early 90s. That being said, I was very happy my article was accepted. For a Galdosista, publication here is almost a must.

  6. Desgraciadamente, esto que cuentan no es raro en publicaciones españolas. No es raro que algunas se guarden material “en reserva” para publicarlo si un año no alcanzan a llenar la revista.

    Me ha ocurrido (con otra revista) que después de casi *cinco* años sin dar señales de vida, van y se descuelgan con la publicación del artículo, sin aviso, sin notas para la revisión, sin envío de pruebas, ni nada. El artículo llevaba tres años publicado en una publicación mucho más prestigiosa. Cuando sus editores se enteraron, el que quedó mal fui yo.

    Por esta razón ya no publico en España. Para publicaciones europeas serias, hay que ir a Reino Unido, Holanda o Alemania.

    • Esta publicación no es “española”; es de la Boston University. El tópico de la espera es igual en todos sitios…..tenemos el “vuelva usted mañana” en publicaciones estadounidenses también.

  7. This journal has changed a lot in the recent years, and not in a good way. There is no blind review any more. Your article gets reviewed by a single person who knows who you are the entire time. It’s obvious that the goal of the editors is to weed out submissions by people whose names are not very well-known in the field just yet.

    It’s sad to see how the standards of what used to be a great journal have fallen.

    • I am currently on the Editorial Board of AG, have reviewed quite a few essays, and I have always been sent blind submissions by the Editor, with the author’s identifying information removed. If I do happen to know the identity of the author, I always recuse myself. Also, it is inaccurate to state that younger scholars are not published. (Take a look at the TOC of recent issues.)

  8. There were definitely three reviewers for the article I submitted. Two were blind reviewers and then then there were comments from the general editor. I remember it being slow (I had to send a couple of reminders) and I had to do major revisions, but the article was eventually published. The editorial board is composed of important scholars in the field. The journal is still behind (they are still publishing back issues trying to catch up). Perhaps that is part of the problem.

  9. I can’t speak to all of these comments, but many of the above do not describe my experience even remotely. My article was reviewed by at least two individuals. The review was blind. Comments were ample. Response was timely. I would not hesitate to submit another work.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *