Revisions/Rejections

---

Typically, articles that are granted consideration are not immediately accepted after an initial reading by reviewers. Authors are usually asked to make certain revisions at various stages in the review process.

However, in certain cases, a reviewer might reject the work outright, in which case the chief and associate editors will determine if such rejection is truly merited, and, if so, construct a clear and concise response to the author communicating the rejection and the reasons given for it.

Where a paper can be improved, either slightly or significantly, such will be communicated to the author by the editors in charge of the paper in a timely manner. After revisions, the editors will determine if the referee's comments have been adequately addressed, or if further review is warranted (in which case another round of referee work will be initiated).

In all circumstances, Limina reserves the right to reject any submission at any stage of the review process should the relevant revisions be addressed poorly or otherwise inadequately. Again, the final determination for publication decisions rests with the Editor-In-Chief and the Associate Editor.

Common reasons for rejection include but are not limited to:

• the argument of the paper is not presented in a sensible or logical order, or is otherwise unclear
• the argument of the paper is simply, on its own merits, not cogent or it has not been properly supported by the relevant evidence
• there is a lack of sound theoretical basis for the paper's argument(s), and/or the evidence and facts presented in the paper are done so without proper argumentation or analysis

It should also be noted that papers submitted to Limina should not require major editing in terms of the basics like spelling, grammar, style, etc., and so it is conceivable that a paper might be rejected just because of these factors alone, irrespective of the content of the paper.