Is it time to vote on your favorite (define that however you want) entry in the Fake Review Contest, even though many of the entries turned out to be real (disturbing)? You can review the entries in their entirety by scrolling through recent posts, or you can refer to the handy list of excerpts that I have included in this post. The poll is below. You have to choose one.
1. if this paper had been better, I would have read it and loved it
2. [this paper] is filled with dangerous ideas crammed into a package with a mundane exterior
3. plagiarism example
4. Why didn’t the author [insert thing that is indicated clearly in the title]?
5. I don’t know anything about the topic of this paper but I’m going to review it anyway
6. Since the author is a woman, I had lowered my expectations accordingly, but the author did not even meet those.
7. something is wrong somewhere
8. There was no point in my reading the entire paper because .. the authors assert with no supporting evidence that the world is round.
9. Dear Editor, In the future please waste your own time.
10. The experiments seem to be toys
11. I couldn’t help but noticed that my work is not cited in this paper
12. If the authors had high-quality data, interesting ideas, and an understandable discussion and conclusions, I would write a positive review. In the absence of those items, I regret that I must hate this paper.
13. one of the authors is the nephew of [someone important to me and so] this is a definite accept
14. These authors would be well advised to wait until my paper is published, and then they can cite it.
15. Presumably you are doing something smarter than what you describe, so you should explain that.
16. Mad Libs review (The authors describe how they (phrase from abstract) etc.)
17. vague review Sent from my iPhone
18. However, I don't think the method is correct in principle.
19. Although we made you do two revisions which cost you time .. we still will not accept your paper [for political reasons]
20. This paper is transformative and should be published immediately with only minor revisions.
21. This work disagrees with several unpublished results, and .. is unsuitable for publication in this journal or ANY OTHER ONE [sic] on the planet.