Let me figure out the pits for the friends in the direction of nano. I saw some comments before saying that the rejection letter would not be sent if the manuscript was rejected, and there was some doubt. I personally experienced this magical operation. 9.28, submitted; 10.2, awaiting referee report, I tough it was sent for review, but it did not; 10.9 awaiting decision; 10.14 rejected. It was not rejected by the reviewers, but by the editor, saying that the direction is not consistent. Although the delay was not long, it was still a bit. Those are doing purely physical nano-directions can have a try. If the topic is relatively specific, then change to another journal. But the journal itself is good.

(6) Thank | 火咖

This is the best work during the PhD. Because it’s impossible to be accepted by PRL as there is no experiment, I tried submitting to NJP. Both reviewers are small peers and understand it very well. It is recommended to accept with very small changes. It is estimated that the editorial office is very careful, and it should be with editor for at least 2 weeks till a minor revision was required. But there was one Indian, who was very disgusting and asked us to cite two articles of Indian. I even don't know what journal it is. According to the reviewer's request, it was revised for 1 hour. After resubmitted, it was accepted. But the publication process is a bit slow. One month has passed and it has not been published yet.

(5) Thank | Handsomesix

It was submitted on June 15th, and first review comments were given on October 28th. One reviewer strongly agreed to publish and gave a few basic comments. The other reviewer was being very difficult. But after our serious discussion and analysis, a very serious and detailed answer which we thought was replied. The article was almost rewritten (In order to express our serious attitude, the revised manuscript followed the two Reviewer’s comments), and re-submitted on November 27th. Unexpectedly, the second reviewer was still making things difficult for some details and was very inclined to reject the manuscript. The editor rejected the manuscript according to the attitude of that reviewer. The final rejection date was December 19th. After a total of 6 and a half months, the manuscript was still rejected. I wanted to appeal, but I didn't dare to waste any more time due to a tight schedule. I finally chose to transfer my article. Thus, I do not recommend that you transfer the article...

(4) Thank | jinjin

I have an article that was accepted to this journal. The two reviewers were professional and helpful. They made my article better in significant ways. The reviewers’ review speed was relatively fast. This is an open source journal with an impact factor of about 3.8 and a layout fee of more than 6,000 RMB.

(3) Thank | Anonymous

Not bad! 
Returned for revisions after over 50 days, accepted after 80 days. 
There were two reviewers, one raised very detailed and professional questions which I believe were helpful for improving the quality of the manuscript. 
The other reviewer had a slightly different perspective, but was not too difficult. 
The editor was also good, responding to emails in a timely manner. 
The only downside was the high publication fee. 
Overall, it was good. 
In terms of the field, I feel they prefer a slightly more innovative and interdisciplinary approach.

(0) Thank | 季住我

The review process is very fast, with the review results returned within one month.

(0) Thank | snowforever

The New Journal of Physics is a very good journal, where one can often see leading figures in the field publishing their impressive work. The journal has very strict peer review process, and it is difficult to publish purely theoretical articles without a certain level of innovation. The ranking of pure physics journals in the minds of physicists is: PRL>PRX>NJP>PRA/B/C-; it is said that many articles rejected by PRL will be submitted to New Journal of Physics first. In the end, I hope to see my own work accepted and published by NJP next time. Keep working hard!

(0) Thank | PHYSICS2023

I feel like NJP doesn't have much influence. What do you think?

(0) Thank | 佐治

2023.08.04 submitted
2023.08.11 awaiting referee reports
2023.09.13 major revision
2023.10.31 submitted
2023.11.13 provisionally accepted
2023.11.14 formal accepted

(0) Thank | 天边残梦

Where can I find the status of a certain unknown elementary student? It seems like NJP is not the correct status

(0) Thank | optics 皮卡丘

1
Stage 1, Editorial Assessment, completed
2
Stage 2, Review, in progress
Sub-stage 2.1, Out to reviewers, completed
Hooray! We’re searching for expert referees to review your paper, and we’ll be back in touch with you when their reports are in.
Sub-stage 2.3, All reviewer reports received
3
Stage 3, Revision
4
Stage 4, Acceptance
5
Stage 5, Production
6
Stage 6, Published

(0) Thank | 某不知名小学生

Just saw someone mention that this website can show detailed status. It is recommended that the OP take a look at it https://publishingsupport.iopscience.iop.org/your-article/

(0) Thank | 某不知名小学生

Pretty fast. Submitted in mid-June, received minor revisions from two reviewers in mid-July, pre-accepted in early August, officially accepted in mid-August. Processing speed is very fast

(0) Thank | daiside

2023.01.29 submitted
2023.02.09 awaiting referee reports
2023.06.12 Major Revision
2023.07.02 submitted
2023.07.05 awaiting referee reports
2023.07.17 provisionally accepted
2023.07.18 formally accepted

I highly praise the reviewers of this journal. Their comments are all very professional, and one reviewer even provided feedback down to the page and line number, pointing out specific issues.

(0) Thank | 天边残梦

Normally, it takes over two months for the review process. This journal is just very slow.

(0) Thank | 漫天星辰花

It is a very good journal. Our senior colleagues have submitted articles to it before, and the reviewers are very professional. The review process of this journal is still very strict, not very easy.

(0) Thank | 漫天星辰花

2023.01.29 submit
2023.02.09 awaiting referee reports

(0) Thank | 天边残梦

Just invested today, hoping to win.

(0) Thank | 天边残梦

If you have waited too long, you can send a reminder letter to urge them. It is very likely that the editor has forgotten.

(1) Thank | optics 皮卡丘

It has been almost two months since I submitted, but there has been no news. I don't know why.

(19) Thank | DK不吃榴莲

I am also appealing. There are two reviewers, one agrees and one disagrees, but the editor rejected it directly. I have already appealed, and the editor is still finding new reviewers.

(0) Thank | 木木不是木头啦

So, when you submitted your contribution, did it get rejected by the system? And then did you appeal?

(1) Thank | optics 皮卡丘

The overall process, from the speed of review to publication, feels quite fast. Two reviewers provided suggestions, which were not overly strict, and the paper was accepted right after responding. However, the page charges are not cheap, so it is still recommended to submit.

(0) Thank | Geng0912

May I ask, after a submission, if it shows "awaiting decision" for two to three days, and then changes to "Awaiting Referee Reports" for another two to three days, does it mean that it has been sent for external review or that the editorial department has directly rejected the submission?

(0) Thank | honestly

The editor is very professional. One of the three reviewers has been entangled in a seemingly important but irrelevant issue. The other two have agreed to publish the article after two rounds of review. We directly sent an email to the editor-in-chief to appeal, and the next day it was accepted. This journal favors work with solid theoretical foundations. It has a good reputation in Europe. At the same time, when familiar professors in the department were chatting, they mentioned that the rejection process for high-quality papers is more complicated and requires at least two editors to deliberate. If a paper is rejected after their deliberation, it indicates that the editorial department is hesitant...

(1) Thank | 小齐的七