$db->query($query) or die("Failed to update tbljournal table");
$db->query($query) or die(sprintf("<pre>Failed to update tbljournal table.\nERROR: %s\nSTATEMENT: %s</pre>", $db->error(), $query));
Failed to update tbljournal table.
ERROR: 1064: You have an error in your SQL syntax. Check the manual that corresponds to your MySQL server version for the right syntax to use near 's transmittal letter and determine whether you can complete the
STATEMENT: update tbljournal set chFocusScope = '',
nReviewersPerPaper = '1',
nReviewDueWeeks = '2',
chReviewProcess = '',
chReviewerGuideline = 'GUIDELINES FOR REVIEWERS
Example from the American Society for Micobriology Journals...
On receipt of the manuscript, you the reviewer should do three things immediately.
Read the editor's transmittal letter and determine whether you can complete the review in the stated time period, usually 2 to 3 weeks.
Double-check the author's cover letter if included, the manuscript title page, and the Acknowledgments section to determine whether there is any conflict of interest for you (with the authors, their institution, or their funding sources) and whether you can judge a given article impartially. (See also p. 5 of these Guidelines.)
Quickly skim the relevant portions of the manuscript and verify that it fits within the scope of the journal.
If you have either a time problem or a conflict of interest, contact the editor for instructions. He may extend your deadline, ask whether there is a colleague at your institution who could do the review, or ask you to return the manuscript to him for reassignment (and, if possible, for you to provide the names and addresses of other reviewers who are competent to handle the subject matter). You may not give the manuscript to a colleague to review without the editor's permission. If your cursory examination reveals that the manuscript does not fit within the scope of the journal, contact the editor for instructions.
Do not discuss the paper with its authors either during or after the review process. Although it may seem natural and reasonable to discuss points of difficulty or disagreement directly with an author, especially if you are generally in favor of publication and do not mind revealing your identity, this practice is prohibited because the other reviewer and the editor may have different opinions, and the author may be misled by having "cleared things up" with the reviewer who contacted him/her directly.
The manuscript sent to you for review is a privileged document. Please protect it from any form of exploitation. Do not cite a manuscript or refer to the work it describes before it has been published and do not use the information that it contains for the advancement of your own research or in discussions with colleagues.
In your comments intended for the author, do not make statements about the acceptability of a paper (see the next paragraph); suggested revisions should be stated as such and not expressed as conditions of acceptance. Organize your typed review so that an introductory paragraph summarizes the major findings of the article, gives your overall impression of the paper, and highlights the major shortcomings. This paragraph should be followed by specific, numbered comments, which, if appropriate, may be subdivided into major and minor points. (The numbering facilitates both the editor's letter to the author and evaluation of the author's rebuttal.) Criticism should be presented dispassionately; offensive remarks are not acceptable.
Confidential remarks directed to the editor should be typed (or handwritten) on the appropriate review form. Advise the editor of your recommendation for acceptance, modification, or rejection by checking the review form at the appropriate place. The final decision regarding modification, acceptance, or rejection of a manuscript rests solely with the editor, so do not state your recommendation in the portion of the review that will be sent to the author.
After completing your review, transmit your comments via mail, fax, or e-mail to the editor. If so requested by the editor, return the original manuscript, including illustrations, to the editor in the envelope provided; otherwise, destroy it.
It is recommended that you make a copy of the review for your files. The manuscript may be returned to you for a second review, particularly if the requested modification was extensive. In addition, if the manuscript is resubmitted after rejection, the new version may be sent to you for review. In either case, you will need to evaluate the author's responses to your original criticisms.',
bOpenAccess = '1',
chOpenAccess = 'This journal provides open access to all of it content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge. Such access is associated with increased readership and increased citation of an author's work. For more information on this approach, see the Public Knowledge Project, which has designed this system to improve the scholarly and public quality of research, and which freely distributes the journal system as well as other software to support the open access publishing of scholarly resources.',
chSectionPolicies = '',
chPrivacyStatement = 'The names and email addresses entered in this journal site will be used exclusively for the stated purposes of this journal and will not be made available for any other purpose or to any other party.'
$query = "update tbljournal set chFocusScope = '" . addslashes($chFocusScope) . "',
nReviewersPerPaper = '" . addslashes($nReviewersPerPaper) . "',
nReviewDueWeeks = '" . addslashes($nReviewDueWeeks) . "',
chReviewProcess = '" . addslashes($chReviewProcess) . "',
chReviewerGuideline = '" . addslashes($chReviewerGuideline) . "',
bOpenAccess = '" . addslashes($bOpenAccess) . "',
chOpenAccess = '" . addslashes($chOpenAccess) . "',
chSectionPolicies = '" . addslashes($chSectionPolicies) . "',
chPrivacyStatement = '" . addslashes($chPrivacyStatement) . "'";
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot] and 1 guest