This journal is good, but every year, the budget articles of GCP greatly increased the impact factor of this journal. So in fact, this journal has an impact factor of 4 to 5 at most. Those who fools the school leaders can submit, but those have real talents should consider twice before submission. You’d better study (how to make an article published in) the top journal in specialty than have a mood of opportunism.

(40) Thank | 小凡凡5566

The journal editor is relatively responsible, but the review process is a bit long. The time may have been mainly spent on finding reviewers, but the reviewers' comments are sharp and hit the key points, which also took a considerable amount of time to revise. Overall, it was a good submission experience. On a side note, essd has strict control over data quality and requires a certain level of innovation in methods, which is deserving of its high impact factor and has room for further growth (personal subjective feeling, please do not criticize if you disagree).

(0) Thank | 111

The MS record can show whether reviewers have been found. If they have been found but have not responded, please send an email to the editor to assign someone else.

(1) Thank | An_apple_a_day

24 Jul 2024 File upload
17 Aug 2024 Topic editor initial decision: Start review and discussion
19 Aug 2024 Preprint posted
19 Aug 2024 Discussion started, expected end 23 Oct 2024 | The primal end of discussion was 07 Oct 2024
25 Oct 2024 Final response
11 Nov 2024 Topic editor decision: Publish as is
12 Nov 2024 File upload
15 Nov 2024 Production file validation completed
It went relatively smoothly. It was difficult to find reviewers, but the editorial process was slow, with an average of about a week for each step.
It took a month to find reviewers, reviewers generally have around three weeks, revisions took two weeks (two minors), and the editorial process took another week to accept.
However, it also takes 1.5 - 2 months from acceptance to publication.

(0) Thank | An_apple_a_day

It has been almost five months since submission, but I still haven't received any feedback from the reviewers. The review process keeps getting delayed. Do we have no choice but to wait indefinitely?

(0) Thank | www

Topical editor nomination by chief editor (ESSD discussions) rejected after over a month for not being within the scope of the journal, with slow processing speed, submissions should be made carefully.

(0) Thank | WesleyLiu6

After being sent to the topic editor for nearly two months, it was rejected on the grounds of not meeting the scope of the journal. The processing speed is extremely slow, so submissions should be made carefully.

(0) Thank | WesleyLiu6

It's been 3 months already, I've reminded several times, but still no response

(0) Thank | YUAN007

The submission was made on March 12th, and a topic editor was assigned. After sending a reminder email once, three months had passed and the topic editor was finally assigned on June 10th. The speed of this process is quite exaggerated. Hopefully, there can be further discussion

(0) Thank | lsasdf

I can't help but comment on this. This magazine has already reviewed and accepted several articles, but the efficiency is really dangerously low. It takes an average of 45 days to find an associate editor, and another 15 days for the associate editor to decide on submission. So just the decision to submit takes an average of 2 months now... Currently, two articles are in submission process, with one still looking for a second reviewer for a year, and the other having just found the second reviewer after 10 months. The efficiency at every stage is extremely low

(0) Thank | 雨过无尘

My status is this, topical editor nomination by chief editor (essd discussions). Can I ask how long has this status been going on? And what does this status mean? Thank you for the explanation, OP!

(0) Thank | storm_pika

The chief editor in charge of the manuscript has been assigned, but the chief editor has not taken over yet.

(0) Thank | boym2010

May I ask if "in review" means it is still with the editor for editing or if it has been sent for review? Additionally, in another interface, it states: 
Status: Topical editor nomination by chief editor (ESSD Discussions). It has been almost half a month now, what is the current status?

(0) Thank | 温柔善良帅气

The initial review was quite strict, and now it has become even stricter. After submission, not only do you need to respond to the reviewer's comments, but you also need to engage in an interactive discussion. This is also a major trend. Both the code and data need to be provided, emphasizing the quality and utilization of the data.

(2) Thank | giermeng

The DOI number is obtained when you store your data in a public database.

(0) Thank | 中中中678

Does this journal charge a fee for submission?

(0) Thank | Enlighten_qm

10.18 received
12.16 started discussing and posting preprint
......
2022.6, rejected after re-review

Both initial reviewers recommended rejection, editor requested revisions. For re-review, new reviewers were sought, one requested major revisions while the other recommended rejection, resulting in final rejection.
Overall, the process took a very long time, and some reviewers were very mean.

(2) Thank | 豆子

The journal is not bad overall, but the impact factor is artificially inflated, which makes people very uneasy, similar to LDD in the previous years.

(33) Thank | hnzk

Highly recognized journals in the industry. They mainly publish large-scale datasets or maps. The topical handling editor has significant authority and strict requirements for the content and quality of the articles. Prior to external review, the editor already provides many revision suggestions. They have their unique review process and manuscript template, and it is necessary to strictly organize the content according to the journal's requirements. Once the external review (entering the discussion stage) is submitted, the chances of acceptance are relatively high.

(16) Thank | chatinger

Can't help but say a few words. The original poster may be a big shot in the industry, but please consider the bitterness of us bottom-level research workers. With an impact factor of 11, being the second-ranked journal out of 200 in the field of geosciences, the journal is being referred to by the original poster as a scam and submitting articles to it is considered exploiting loopholes. I would like to ask if there are any journals in any field that have an impact factor of over 10, publish fewer than 200 articles per year, and are still considered scam journals? The original poster claims that high citation rates of GCP articles boost the overall impact factor, but this is a concept switch. Can you provide an example of a journal where only a few articles have high citation rates? Even in reputable journals like CNS, there are also a large number of articles with extremely low citation rates. According to the original poster's perspective, are those authors also exploiting and deceiving their leaders? Except for the three GCP articles in ESSD, the original poster cannot see the abundance of excellent articles and data, and based solely on their limited understanding, spreads such opinions on the internet. I checked the WoS data and found that in terms of the number of articles published in ESSD, Chinese authors rank only fifth, with research workers from the United States, Germany, France, and England ahead of them. Are they all deceiving their leaders too, according to the original poster's perspective? According to the original poster's view, how many people in China are actually doing legitimate research?

(1) Thank | chatinger

I would like to ask you about the submission process. Do I need to publish the data first before submitting? I noticed that the data requires a DOI number. How can I obtain that?

(0) Thank | 慧慧哎呦呵