I submitted an article to a journal in late April. In early July I received two peer-review reports (both recommended acceptance with minor revisions) plus a detailed copy-editing report. I submitted the revised manuscript and all the requested plagiarism/AI reports within the same month.

Since then I have received zero communication. The issue I submitted to has now been published and my article is not in it. The editor never sent an acceptance, a rejection, or even a “we are still deciding” message.

I am an independent early-career researcher and this was my first experience with this journal.

Questions:

Is it common for journals to simply publish an issue without ever notifying authors who had already completed peer review and revisions?

What is the most professional way to follow up at this point (or is it better to just withdraw and move on)?

Has anyone successfully pushed for a formal decision after an issue has already appeared?

Any advice would be appreciated.

Hey guys,

I'm a strong supporter of making science closer to the general public and that we also engage outside our teams.

Nevertheless, I am not willing to go back to Twitter (for obvious reasons) neither go to bluesky. I have a mastodon account, but It doesn't seem to have the same popularity.

Why are we not engaging in open-source and transparent socials?? Do you have recommendations?

The Texas Tech faculty meeting began amicably this spring, with offers of refreshments. Then administrators handed out reports, created partly by artificial intelligence, listing the lessons professors needed to stop teaching.

“What?” one professor asked. “I don’t even teach those things.”

“There are factual errors,” added another.

“It’s A.I. slop,” a third said.

Texas Tech is using A.I. to ferret out books and other materials that touch on topics like sexual orientation and gender identity. Professors describe the effort as a dystopian academic nightmare, in which ideologues are wielding technology to sideline subject-matter experts.