Editor Interviews

We accept work because we believe in it as submitted, so authors should not expect substantial developmental editing after acceptance. We may suggest light edits for clarity, consistency, grammar, punctuation, or formatting, and we consult the contributor when a change affects the work itself.
For poetry, we take particular care to preserve line breaks, spacing, punctuation, and visual arrangement. Contributors have the opportunity to review and approve changes before publication. Our goal is to present the work as thoughtfully and accurately as possible while preserving the writer’s voice and intent.

We do edit before publishing. The extent of the edit will depend on the story, but we lean toward less editing if possible. This usually ends up being a light line edit.
We try to be very straightforward with our edits and keep you completely in control. Editing is my favorite part of the job, so I try to make sure it's a pleasant experience for the writers as well and take the chance to get to know them and their preferences. Generally, edits can be accepted or rejected. You do have to remove certain swear words if we ask, though! (It's in our guidelines.)
Common edits will pertain to Chicago conformity, American English, grammar, punctuation, and word choice. Less common edits might dig into tense switching, rewording a sentence or two for clarity, perspective shifts, and deleting swear words.

If a piece really excites us but isn't quite "there" yet, we sometimes work with an author to make the substantial changes we think are needed prior to publication. Usually, though, it's a matter of very small line edits and a few rounds of proofreading. We try not to accept pieces that aren’t fully there yet. If it needs work, but is really close, we typically lean toward an encouraging-reject. The author approves all edits we make, and they'll also approve the proof in its print-ready layout.

See previous answer. But it tends to be ... a lot.

Needless to say, this varies. But with any given submission there is certainly the possibility that we will propose substantive, developmental editing if we believe that is in the book's best interest. This particular "mom and pop" have nearly 80 years of editorial experience combined, which is why a lot of authors come to us. There is always give and take between author and editor. In the end, we arrive where we need to be.

For the most part, we only edit typos where the author clearly meant another word. We do this without asking the author. We also change British spellings to American spellings unless being British is an integral part to the story. We never make substantive changes to a submission of any kind without first working with the author to have them accept or decline our suggestions.

We do copy editing and proofreading and suggest stylistic and editorial decisions to fit the end cohesive whole.

Prior to acceptance, we might suggest a cut. The most common cut is the last line where the author restates their case, but the editors felt it was already well communicated. After acceptance, we have a great copy editor who reports the miscellaneous typos, etc., which we review with the authors. The authors are always given an opportunity to review and approve the layout of their submission before publication.

Poetry not at all.
Prose: lightly to a little more than lightly (we don't have the bandwidth or timeline to do deeper edits).

At times, a line or two. We may offer a suggestion for an author to take or leave.

I’ll occasionally edit a story and send questions or suggestions back to the author for approval if I think the work is a good fit. Luckily, audio is forgiving, and we tend to rely more on feel and cadence than strict rules or punctuation. Because we’re a small publication, we don’t have the capacity for a lot of back and forth, so we may pass on pieces that need substantial editing.

Proofreading: always. We also go for copy editing and line editing. Substantive revisions are something we have been trying not to commit to lately. The reason is the sheer number and quality of submissions we receive. We end up having a full issue without having to offer extensive revisions to "maybe" submissions.

Just grammar checks only. No editing. We upload without further approve from the authors. We expect the work to be polished.

Editing varies. All accepted pieces go through basic proofreading. Some pieces are accepted as is. Others get additional line editing. If I find the core of the piece to be exactly what I'm looking for, but it's buried in mud, then I'll suggest more substantive edits to the writer and let them choose if/how they would like to proceed.

Every piece requires something different, so there isn't a one-size-fits-all editing process at The Rebis. We see editing as a creative collaboration. Our first round of feedback is often developmental, offering questions, reflections, and prompts that invite the writer to deepen or clarify the work. We want to help each piece become more fully itself! Once we've received a revised draft, we typically move into line editing, focusing on language, rhythm, structure, and clarity. Throughout the process, the author remains an active collaborator. We discuss edits together, and no substantive changes are made without the writer's approval.

It depends on the piece. Sometimes we work with the author and edit each and every line with them. If it is just a few issues with grammar or something, we sort it out, and then send it to the author. They get to approve the final edits.

It really depends on the project. Some pieces need very little editing. Others need close attention. I’m all about the ones that need attention, because it allows me to partner with the author for an extended period of time.

We respect the hard work our contributors put to their submissions and try to not alter them too much for publication. For each piece, there is an editor-in-charge assigned for general revisions and more specific line editing. During the editorial process, we communicate with the authors through email. The edited piece will then be checked by the editor-in-chief and then we will have a final version agreed upon by the author and the editors.
After the typesetting process begins, the editors-in-charge exchange their assigned pieces with each other for proofreading. The intent is that each piece will be read by a fresh eye so that typos and misspellings will be more easily spotted. Then we send the finalized version to confirm with the author whether they would like to make any last-minute change or have style-wise suggestions.

We try to edit as little as possible. Mostly for clarity. We tend to ask if the edit is not purely grammatical, although our editorial vision is sharp and we have essentially never found this process difficult to navigate.

This varies piece to piece, but we try to accept pieces with minimal editing needs since we have to choose between so many great submissions already. Some pieces are fully publication-ready and zero edits are made at all before publication. Some undergo some basic technical edits for typos and errant grammatical choices, as needed. Some get light-to-moderate developmental edits that we'll work through with them, usually to pare down an excellent piece that's a little too long or that could use just some structural rearranging. A few are only accepted on the condition of certain, moderately developmental edits being made that we'll work through with them. Authors get final approval of any and all changes, and it's important to us that the author's vision and intentions for the piece are honored on the page and accurately represented by the webdesign.

In our acceptance letter to successful submitters, we state "we reserve the right to make minor editorial changes to your piece before publication, under the terms of our General Submission Guidelines. We will send you screenshot proofs of your story and bio pages before we go to publication, so you may check and sign off on these."
Even before we reach the acceptance stage, If we find a submitted piece is strong, but that it requires attention from the author in set places – perhaps even a little rewriting – then we tell them so, pointing out what we have found and our proposal for what they might do to enhance their piece; ultimately the choice is theirs, but it is also our of course! We may still accept a piece as is, but could also finally reject it, if it remains unchanged despite our recommendations.

I give it one good pass, then send it back to the author to accept/reject edits and add anything they need. I give it one more read through, then publish it. I mostly do copy editing/proof reading. If the story is good enough to be published, it usually doesn't need substantial work.

We generally err on trusting the writer to have said what they said. Any editing is light and writers can ask for changes even after publication. Proofreading definitely happens, substantive rarely. If it required substantive changes we probably wouldn't have accepted it or asked the writer about it before acceptance. We do sometimes make suggestions that are more substantive as a condition of publishing, meaning 'if you're ok with this we'd be happy to accept the piece,' but always heavily weighted toward the writer knows their work the best.

Most stories arrive ready to go, but we lightly polish every story before publishing.
Occasionally, we will ask an author for a rewrite, but these stories ultimately involve collaboration (developmental editing) to bring to publication, so they are rare.
My editorial style involves asking questions, sharing insights, and standing back, allowing authors time to make decisions. Authors approve final edits because the editorial process is dynamic, not one-sided. But I also don't work off the premise, "This is your story, dear author, so anything you say goes."
(Gasp--what?)
Can we agree that it's often challenging for an author to see gaps in their story?
We're here to help, not do battle.
Allison and I efficiently spot problems so writers can fix them. (And we're your biggest fans, too!)
Check out what authors say about us on our website. :-)

It depends on the piece. Some works acceptances are contingent on some minor edits. But for the most part we just edit for basic grammar and punctuation. Every now and then we will reach out to an artist to clarify a typo or word choice. Our page size is also skinny, so we will sometimes need to talk to an artist if their accepted work has unconventional line breaks.

Depends. We have moved away from heavy edits. We prefer a piece to be largely ready to go. That said, we will work with developmental edits, but we are a smaller team and often cannot dedicate the time to fully developing a piece with an author.

We've done everything from copy and paste a ready story to full line edits. All pieces go through basic proofreading, and authors get to see what we're publishing beforehand.

We don't usually edit much; occasionally we will suggest changes and work with the author to arrive at a mutual decision.

We will sometimes offer authors detailed notes and an invitation to revise and resubmit. For accepted pieces, however, we offer fairly light edits (our production schedule doesn't allow for major revisions) and authors are welcome to reject any suggestions they'd like. We don't accept a piece if we wouldn't be willing to publish it as-is! The majority of our suggestions are small tweaks for clarity; we also do a few rounds of proofreading. Authors approve the text during the editing phase and also receive a proof copy of the issue shortly before release for their final approval.

We send proofs to our authors and they always get to approve final edits. The work we accept receives proofreading and occasional copyediting. We don't often engage in substantive editing or line editing because we accept pieces we believe are already working on those levels.

The Artist her or himself is in charge of this kind of thing. Please do it BEFORE you submit. If something is riddled with errors, we will return it.

Depends on the needs. Very little on poetry which comes complete, it seems, for the poems accepted. For fiction and CNF, heavy edits when needed if the piece shows promise, but only minor changes on polished submissions--all with cooperative with the authors a back-and-forth process.

We look for polished work, however, each genre editor will carefully read for copy edits before a piece is formatted. Authors work with the genre editor to approve and discuss edits. It's not uncommon for each fiction or nonfiction work to have 2-6 small copyedits requested, or 1-2 for a poem. On rare occasions we like a piece enough to discuss substantive edits with a contributor. When this is the case, we will not 100% accept the piece until 1-2 rounds of edits to ensure the writer is on board and able to make the edits at this time. It's important to us that the writer is also happy with proposed edits. It is their work. We also have a line limit for the number of characters our publication can hold. This means that sometimes a poem with long lines needs to get wrapped, but most poets who use the long line understand this.

We do not edit which is why it has to be perfect - we are so disappointed when we find typos or glaring unintentional errors in a submission. The word count is always under 1000 words - pay attention to details before submitting.

This ranges dramatically. I've taken writers through as many as a half-dozen passes on a manuscript before it goes to the copyeditor, but typically there's one developmental editing pass followed by a quicker review of the revised manuscript. From there, the manuscript goes through copyediting, typesetting, and then proofreading. The author is closely involved at every stage and gets final approval of the proofread pages.

We only do basic proofreading. The pieces we want to see are ones that have been edited thoroughly. Any major suggested edits and changes we wish to make go through the author before publication.
-Jaden Rudd, Head Editor

We do edit for basic grammar and mechanics but try to keep this to a minimum. Writers agree to that process in our publishing contract. That’s why it’s so important to send in polished work. If a submitted piece requires too much editing, we will nearly always reject it, as we’re so pressed for time. -Lauren Tivey, Faculty Advisor

The amount and type of editing required depends on the length of the piece. Poems typically require copy edits and basic proofreading, while longer works, such as essays or short stories, may require line editing as well. If a piece requires substantive editing, we likely will not accept it for publication. The author always has final say -- they can accept or reject all edits, with the exception of grammatical changes and typos.

We usually do a developmental edit, which can vary from chopping up an ending or moving chapters around, to light pacing issues and character arc strengthening. The comes copy/line editing, then proofing. We're a full service publisher basically. And it's a collaboration, so no edits are made that the author doesn't get to sign off on.

Accepted pieces go through three stages of editing that focus on grammatical errors and spelling. After that, they are put into InDesign and are put through additional editing rounds to ensure everything is ready for the print issue. If there's anything we need clarification on, we will email the author directly to make sure all author intent and style is preserved. We will also refrain from grammatical edits if it is clearly a stylistic choice which can come up often with poetry.

We proofread everything and fact-check when there are facts to check. Depending on what the piece needs, we work with the author on everything from copy edits to substantive edits. We highly value the editorial process and view it as a collaboration.

Our genre editors work closely with the writers on line edits out of the gate. They do an initial pass after the piece is accepted, which may include some larger-scale edits, all done with author approval. There is another round of edits done during compilation to catch formatting issues and edits needed to adhere to the Chicago Manual of Style. Writers get to review and approve the final proof before we go to print.

Editing is done on the basis of what is needed per piece. Sometimes, we rewrite bits -- sometimes we don't. We always value clean copy. We try to use British spellings -- but if it's quotes, we don't really change it.
We would not accept copy that needs substantive editing or too much proofing.
The author also gets to approve the edits -- we send the final draft to them if we have made changes.

This varies. We always proofread of course. If the edits are minor (spelling, hyphenation, obvious punctuation mistakes, capitalization), we inform the writer only when we think the irregularity was intentional. We make deeper incisions only with the approval of the writer. If we have more substantive issues with the story, we ask for a revision before we accept.

We provide basic proofreading for accepted pieces, but not substantial edits as we generally don’t accept pieces that require extensive changes.

Accepted pieces go through a light but careful editorial process focused on clarity, structure, and precision at the sentence level. This usually involves line editing and copy editing rather than heavy substantive revision, unless a piece clearly benefits from a small structural adjustment. Authors are consulted on any significant changes and always see and approve the final edits before publication.

Recently, I’ve been editing a collection of entries to FLESH Fiction (our erotic fiction competition) and the editing process has been extensive, however for entries to our regular Not Quite Write Prize for Flash Fiction, our editing process is very light.
We might fix typos and punctuation, but other than that we rarely edit our winning stories before publication (unless the author has asked us to). We chose them for a reason, so we like to retain that experience for our readers as well.

With poetry, we rarely edit, and if so, we typically work with the author to a final product. With stories/essays, we may edit for spelling, grammar, length, and clarity of the piece. We strive to work with authors toward a final piece, suitable for the publication.

My preference is to do little to no editing.

Our comments are intended to permit authors to edit their own material, which is largely successful. On occasion, we take work that requires extensive editing, but that process is understood upfront and entered into enthusiastically or not at all.
We outsource final proofreading to get our eyeballs away from it.

We expect that a story will come to us in its final edited version. I do light copy editing for grammar/spelling/clarity, but outside of that, we do not do substantive editing. Our accepted authors approve and sign a contract that includes a clause that they understand the level of editing we will do, so we do not seek final approval. At this time, we also don't send pieces back for revision and resubmission.

There are some pieces that are published the way the were submitted, but that doesn't happen often. Typically, prose pieces will go through at least one round of edits, generally no more than a "turn and a half" of edits. Unfortunately, since we are all volunteers, most of our editors don't have capacity to work on an piece for more than 2 turns of edits, so they're not likely to accept a piece that would need that much work. Then all prose pieces are copyedited, which the author gets a final say on what they would like to accept or reject, barring anything flagrantly grammatically egregious (unless it's necessary).

Our edits are pretty minor. If a story needs substantial work, we generally just don't accept it. But we'll never reject a piece just because there's a typo or spelling error.
Even with minor edits, the author will have a chance to approve them before publication.

We only do basic proofreading, with light copy editing if absolutely necessary. If a piece needs substantive editing, we send it back to the writer for revision. We always send a preview to the authors for approval.

For the most part, we don't like to change the writer's text, but if it's clearly a typo, we'll probably fix it.

The author gets to approve the edits, however, if there is significant resistance sometimes it means we can't move forward with the story. It's important that there is a good fit between our press and the author, and the editorial process is really intended to improve a writer's work - it's not meant to be a harsh process.

I will edit for grammar and cliches, possibly structure if the order in which the work is written could stand better clarity. I may delete sentences or phrases that are poorly written and not pertinent to the work. I will never edit or change anything a writer has submitted without his/her permission.

I do basic proofreading for works I've already considered publishing, but if something has too many problems, it's often skipped over. Most artwork gets its own page, unless it cannot fit the format (aka horizontal works, which is fine).

Depends on how much editing is needed, but mostly just small errors here and there. Sometimes, if a long prose piece really sticks out to me, I'll help a bit with development if the piece seems to be not quite there yet, but this is super rare.

This will vary by editor. Some of our editors don't accept a piece unless it is ready for publication. Then there will be copy edits and nothing more. Some of our prose editors like to be more hands on.

I don’t like heavy editing - either having it done to my own writing or imposing it on others. The tweaks I make are minimal. I accept very few pieces, and those I do require little to no changes. I believe in publishing work as the writer intended, with only light copyediting if needed. Authors can expect their voice to remain fully intact.

I don't typically need to do substantive editing on a piece, but I will provide any editing I believe the work may need before publication. The author has full control over any changes to the story, and if any of the copyedits were made without understanding of the context. The author also has control over the book's design if they have any requests.

It's a piece-by-piece basis, but at times I'll want to start a conversation with an author about more substantial structural edits. I don't want authors to feel like their piece has to be polished to 100% before submitting. If there's something worthwhile there, whether it's a narrative concept, a character or a writing style, I might decide to open up an editorial process to bring out the piece's strengths. The author always gets final approval.

We do little editing; only as described previously if a top-notch submission can be made even stronger.

We do basic proofreading and occasionally offer small line edits, but the author always gets the final say.

It depends on what shape the book is in. There are some we hardly touch... and there are others where ask for substantial editing before we agree to publish the novel. Of course, we tell the author upfront what our creative concerns are and if they are willing to make the necessary changes. For example, one novel we published to great acclaim originally came in as an 125K word manuscript that we, over several drafts, cut down to 75K words. Another book we recently published was so polished that we simply sent it straight to the copyeditor as-is.
So the short answer is, we'll do a development edit, if necessary, and then it goes on to a professional copyeditor who works with all the major publishers (and has edited our own novels). We used to hire development editors, too, whom we also worked with on our own books, but we've ended up working with the authors ourselves. There were too many instances where a developmental editor's vision didn't align with our own or what we consider the unique "voice" of our publishing company.
We are authors ourselves. We treat authors the way we want to be treated. We respect the author's voice and vision. That said, we also won't publish a book that we don't LOVE...or that we don't believe can succeed commercially. It's our money on the line...and we are a small house. We take the risks seriously.
If there is a fundamental disagreement between us and the author on the changes we think are necessary, then we simply won't publish the book (but that's never happened -- we work that out before any contract is signed). If it's a disagreement over copyediting changes/corrections/suggestions, the author's decision always stands. We want our authors to be happy with the book and with us.

We receive so many submissions these days that pieces that make it to acceptance are sharply written and highly edited already. I do take pride in offering writers the kinds of line edit suggestions I know I appreciate as a writer: a question about a reference or fact, a hyphenated word, slight excesses that could be trimmed, thoughts about how the title works, etc. Our line edit suggestions are for the authors to accept or reject.

Usually very little unless something is obvious, likely missed by the author.

I tend to suggest revisions more often on shortlisted pieces than on accepted ones. It’s important to us that an author’s work speaks in their own voice, as they crafted it. Because of that, we try to edit as little as possible and focus on preserving what’s already working. In all cases, the author gets to approve final edits.

I’ve never done less than two rounds of edits, though three or four rounds are also possible. For each round, I might have anywhere from two to fifty suggestions for the author to consider – even in the case of reprints. The writer is free to accept or reject any suggestion. I’ll even do a final read-through once the story is formatted for the website.

When a piece is accepted for publication, I always brief the author on our suggested edits (if there are any). We never alter the pieces in any way without consulting and working with the author first. Generally, poetry receives the least amount of editing, whereas fiction or nonfiction might receive more.

We only perform basic proofreading. Other changes are a conversation to be had with the creator.

It really depends on the piece. Sometimes we'll only have a couple of light suggestions, and other times our suggestions will be more substantial on a line-by-line basis. We do what we feel we need to do to bring the best out of the writing. We always send the suggested edits to the writers to either approve or reject; it's important to us that the author is happy with the way their work will look when it's published.

Because I am an English teacher, I am a pretty picky proofreader and editor. If the piece is woefully lacking basic grammar / punctuation skills, it's an auto reject. I don't have time to correct multiple errors. However, if the piece simply has one word spelled incorrectly (usually a simple typo) or could benefit from say a better line break or a minor punctuation change, I'm always happy to make those suggestions.
I had a story recently that needed the verb tense aligned (as it flipped back and forth from past to present tense) -- so I gave the writer the chance to fix that. It's tricky, though, because with poetry, especially, writers often fall so in love with their words or even with their line breaks that they do not want to make changes. All I can do is suggest--then it's up to the writer to accept or reject those changes.

In the past there's been a lot of editing but now I am less inclined to do more than check punctuation and spelling and put it in NFNF style so the stories have a uniform appearance on the screen. I reserve the right to ask questions if a piece needs a bit more thinking about but I would always engage with the author to ensure we both agree the piece is ready before I publish. I wouldn't publish without author approval.

Depends on the piece. A lot, none. I've cut a lot of endings off flash pieces. I don't really consider grammar fixes to be editing, but the pieces I accept don't often need that kind of work. I'll give my thoughts on whatever areas I think are weaker if necessary and suggestions on what to do-- but it really ranges from the word level to the line, sentence, even paragraph level. Typically smaller, though. I don't think I've ever asked someone to rework more than part of a paragraph before. I do make it clear in my acceptance letter if there'll be any edits I want to discuss and that they're optional if the acceptance is non-conditional.

Very little. The author has final approval.

All winners of our manuscript contest work with a fellow WWPH writer on edits and with the head of Fiction for WWPH.
Fiction and creative nonfiction manuscripts are also reviewed by a professional proofreader.
Authors approve all edits, including final edits. In addition, the author contributes ideas to our cover book designer and manuscript typesetter to envision the book.
This is a cooperative press--and the winning author must be prepared to work closely on their manuscript for several months prior to publication.

We may suggest minor changes to the story but the editing is really about recording your work and producing it. We encourage writers to read and record their own work and make it sound as good as we possibly can.

Other than minor punctuation or typographical errors, we don't do any additional editing.

Editing ranges from multi-year life changing line edits to very few touches at all. From an editor's perspective, it is very difficult to promote a book and its author if the author regrets the outcome for the book itself or its cover. It also gets weird if we make a suggestion which the author declines and then a few years later they regret having passed on the suggestion.
What we love and what we like and what we're used to are three very different things. We'll share an opinion with the author, but we try to make it a humble share. If the author approves of none of our changes that's fine too. We'll still do the book but we won't always be comfortable talking about the book, or building a literary conversation around it.
Sometimes, a manuscript feels bigger than what we can provide. In this way, some of our line-edited manuscripts have won the National Poetry Series, various Juniper Prizes, and in one case a National Book Award after our encouragements. We also recruit literary agents for authors when we feel that is their best move. If a chapter or section seems to need editing we cannot provide, then we enroll the author in various online workshops (Conscious Writers Collective, Catapult, etc.) and literary conferences.

We try not to change anything beyond proofreading but occasionally make suggestions on lines, words, phrases. Writers review every change before publication.

If a piece requires a lot of, I'll just reject it. If it only needs a few changes (especially directed at making it work better audibly) I'll suggest these changes, but never as a condition of acceptance.
Sometimes small changes will still be made during the recording process. As I perform the piece I might find that a sentence flows better slightly reworded, or a speech tag needs left off or something else minor, and I don't seek approval for these small changes. They are part of the performance, not part of the text.

Usually very little, unless it's to encourage a piece to start later or end earlier.

Our level of editing varies. The author approves final edits but publication may depend on those final edits.

We usually edit lightly. We don't accept pieces that would need such heavy editing that it would destroy the soul of the piece.

Final say always lies with authors. Sometimes substantial edits/rearrangements are strongly suggested/conditional to acceptance, sometimes very few. At least two proofreaders go through the book at proof stage.

We don’t edit submissions; pieces need to be ready to publish as-is. If we notice an obvious grammar or spelling mistake, we’ll check with the author to confirm whether it was intentional before making any correction.

Once I sit down to edit a piece, I go old school. I print out the manuscript and clip it to my clipboard. I carry it around with me and just read it once, entirely through. Then I read it again, this time going through and doing complete edits, from suggesting a new word to moving a comma, sometimes making notes about form or flow. Every manuscript is different, so some may have almost no notes, while others get reworked. Sometimes we even move the order of poems around. Then I send all those edits and notes to the author and give them a week or two to go through them. Then we get together and they either accept or reject edits, or we work together on something. We may go through it more than once. Ultimately, at the end of the day, it's their work. We want it to be the absolute best version.

I rarely edit pieces I accept, and if I do, it is only for grammar. I want the writer's voice to shine through.

I rarely edit submitted stories, but occasionally I will tweak word choice for flow or style, or fix an erroneous word count if it based on a mistake (such as counting hyphenated words, like "fifty-word," as two words instead of one). If a story is more than one or two words out, or fixing the word count would potentially alter the author's intent, I will email the author and ask for or propose a rewrite.

We provide developmental editing, copy editing, and proofreading. Even the most polished manuscripts benefit from an editor's eye and some level of developmental editing.

We edit with care and intention, not intrusion. Most accepted pieces require light to moderate line editing for clarity, rhythm, or precision, and we always work in conversation with the writer. Our goal is not to change the piece, but to help the piece become the clearest version of itself. The writer always has the final say.

It varies. The author gets to approve all edits.

We might have some narrative questions for the author to clear up. Apart from that, the author can expect a round of line editing, copy editing and proofreading. The author gets to approve the final edits.

It really depends on the piece. In general, we tend to be a "light touch" magazine, doing as little editing as we can to retain the author's original intent as much as possible. We have, however, worked with authors to trim large sections out if we felt they were weakening an otherwise fine story. We are considering doing more in the future, but with only two staff, both of whom work day jobs, we prefer this method for the moment.
Authors do have all option to approve/reject edits. In one or two cases, though, we predicated our acceptance on the changes we thought the story needed, and will do so again if we think it's justified. In at least one case, we asked up front if they had intended a different ending, and got a positive response. They had only made the changes at the suggestion of their critique group, and we could tell what their original intent had been, so we had them re-write the ending back to what they intended. That's the kind of editing we like, when the author and we are all on the same page to help make their story shine.

The amount of editing we do varies from story to story. Some authors turn in very polished work, and we barely touch it. Others are great storytellers but their prose is rough, and we line edit freely. Regardless of how much or how little editing we do, we send a preview link a few days before publication so the author has a chance to view the edited version and give their feedback.
Occasionally we'll ask for content edits, such as fixing a continuity error. In those cases we always consult with the author ahead of time.

Really, the work should pretty much be in final form by the time it reaches me. Still, when it comes to poetry, I am willing to sift a manuscript and keep the jewels... if the author is open to that sort of intervention in their work.

We will make small corrections in spelling, punctuation, and grammar. We won't make substantial changes without the author's approval.

We very rarely edit poetry. We assume every word and every comma sent to us is as intended, and complete. We sometimes edit prose, mostly for clarity, sometimes to bring the story or an aspect of the story, forward. We do edit for typos, and too many are cause for rejection, as we try to assume that what folks send us is complete. All edits, however minor, must be approved by the author.

With regard to our prose submission processes (for short essays, creative nonfiction or CNF, flash memoir, fiction, excerpts, and drama), we often provide suggestions, including line editing, copy editing, and proofreading. The author approves final edits in conversation with us. Due to the volume of poetry submissions that we receive, we do not typically provide feedback on poetry submissions. Manifestos, book reviews, interviews, multi-media submissions, and other submitted work also often receive feedback and suggestions. The author/artist approves final edits in these cases, as well, in conversation with us.

I don't. I don't have time to edit. If the story isn't written well I'll automatically reject it. I'm not going to edit your story for you. It should be ready to publish when you send it to me.

We don't edit pieces at all! We only accept fully edited and complete works, as is. This can be unfortunate if we find a piece we like but it still needs some editing work, but we just don't have the time to edit.

We trust that writers will send us only their best, completed work, so other than proofreading and formatting, very little editing is done. If a work is in need of significant re-tooling, it's unlikely to be accepted.

That depends! We do substantive and/or line edits on almost every fiction and nonfiction piece we accept.

Intensive editing, in collaboration with the author.

If a piece needs a ton of editing it isn't ready for publication. We do provide line editing and occasionally suggestions. The author approves all final copy.

The most involved editorial process is usually with visual art. I will never publish a visual art packet without alt-text (alternative text), and I will work with artists to either: (a) get their alt-text/descriptive captions or (b) write those for them.
For writers, I'll generally only make edits to grammar and pacing, and in any cases where changes get made, the author is notified. Regardless of whether changes are made, all contributors are sent proofs of what their pieces will look like when we've published them, and they are allowed to send any comments or concerns about the proof to us.

We do line editing, copy editing, and proofreading. We don't make substantive editing the norm. Authors always get final approval.

It depends on the piece. A lot more editing goes into the prose pieces than the poetry pieces, owing to the different length expectations and form choices. The goal is to make the piece its best self and ensure the author's voice shines through—never to superimpose the editor's aesthetics onto the work. Most of us are writers ourselves, so we respect the effort that goes into producing a piece. In all cases, the author is involved from start to finish, even during proofreading and copy editing, and they must approve a piece before we publish it. This can sometimes involve a significant back-and-forth. The platform is ours, yes, but the author’s name is what is attached to the work itself, so it’s important they are absolutely happy with it when it goes out into the world.

I am willing to do light editing. If a piece requires heavy editing, I have to reject it due to time constraints.

It depends. We always provide basic proofreading and copyediting, we often suggest minor line edits, and in some cases we work with contributors to provide more substantive editing. The author always gets to approve any edits: we send out proofs to all contributors before we go to press.

My philosophy, for 99% of the time, is “only correct what needs correcting.” If you have the wrong “it’s,” we will correct it. If the format of a play doesn’t match the house style, we will contour it to the house style.
In rarer cases, if the format of a poem will change with publication or sentences seem to have major errors, we will work with the writer to ask for changes, and authors get to approve these types of edits.

It is very rare for us to really dev edit a piece, concerning the story. We have had to do it a few times to really make it sing, but more often than not I try to stick to the writers original vision. I want to really work with the writer till they give me the real story, if it is something we like.
When it concerns grammar, punctuation, not making my eyes bleed, it gets hit with the editing stick. Basic proofreading, with murderous intent. Maybe a comma isn't right. Maybe their English isn't American English, then I'll try to stick to their form of grammar. I can be forgiving if it is a style choice, but if you send out a piece make sure it has polish.

We do basic proofreading and light copy editing. If more substantial edits need to take place, we contact the author. The author is able to view their work and approve the final edits before the issue is released.

The level of editing a piece receives varies wildly, but almost every accepted piece is edited to some extent, and I often offer suggestions that I hope have the potential to strengthen the piece.

I try to keep the author's voice as authentic as possible, which includes maintaining various dialects in English, and I don't do heavy edits where I change paragraphs or the tone and style of the piece. I look for consistency and flow, and make sure that in my editing, I am paying more attention to the syntax of the piece. I do provide line and copy editing and basic proofreading as a result.

I mostly try to keep the entire piece in the author's voice, and since I publish work from all over the world, I keep English dialects in the authors language or to their preference. I don't do heavy editing where I change paragraphs or the majority of the text. I work on copy editing, line editing, and basic proofreading and the author always gets to approve the edits. My aim is to keep the work in the author's style, but to make it more polished and grammatically correct unless this is a deliberate choice for purposes of the story. I will only publish work after both parties have agreed to the final edits, and am always open to learning more about the creative choices the author makes.

Our acquiring editors think about the big picture and I think about the line. We have a proofreader who works with us, but we offer the author time to proofread during the editing process too. We are kind editors and we work with the authors to create the best version of their work. Sometimes we have tough conversations about editorial choices, but respect is always the core of our process.

The majority of the work I receive does not need editing. I make minor edits for spelling and grammar. I do not send submissions back for final approval if edits are necessary.

It's rare that we accept a piece pending revisions, unless it's a book review. Pieces submitted to us should be ready to publish as-is, though on rare occasions (usually if a piece is truly unique and compelling in a way we've never seen before) we'll work with an author to get the piece ready. Authors always get the final say in what their piece looks like, and have the right to pull their piece and submit it elsewhere if they do not like our edits.

Normal very little editing, typically line edits only. Author has approval.

For most stories, we provide only minor copy edits for style and personal preference. Authors are given the opportunity to review edits.

It all depends on the submission but every writer gets to approve the final edits.

I answered this above, but will elaborate. We sometimes provide developmental editing, which means that an editor from our staff will work closely with the writer on revisions. We do this mainly for new and emerging authors. We respect our authors' autonomy and will edit direct for "site style" issues, e.g., em-dashes instead of hyphens, and obvious typos, but will not change an author's text without check in with them. The author receives a preview link prior to publication and is invited to let us know if they need to make small changes or want to update their bio.

Some we edit quite heavily and some we barely touch. This is not a reflection of author skill but rather how much we think we can contribute. The author gets to accept or reject every edit with final say.

Authors always get final say over any edits we propose, though if an author refuses to correct all typos and mistakes, we won't publish them. (Thankfully this has never happened.) Our edits are primarily proofreading with minor line edits if needed. If more substantial edits are required, we'll ask for a rewrite and resubmit.

All submissions to Hobeck Books go through a structural edit, a copyedit and then a proofread. Submissions to the Henshaw competition are not edited at all. Every three years or so Hobeck Books puts together the winning Henshaw stories and publishes them as an anthology - all profits going to the charity. The winning entries go through a light edit for style (i.e., grammar and house style) and a proofread) before publication.

I hope the submissions are polished, but I proofread and make minor edits. If a work needs substantial help, I return it. If a part lacks clarity, I check with the author, but I rarely have to share final drafts. I imagine if I were publishing a book, I would have to share drafts. I also have to proofread the posts because sometimes the format gets goofed up. I may miss words blended together or I have typos.

Our process upon acceptance is to pair writers with a copy editor. They have about a month, sometimes a bit longer, to go over their fiction or poetry with the copy editor for mangled sentences and misplaced commas. Occasionally, we "mentor" a promising writer with content editing. We then do a thorough proofreading on the website just before publication.

We don’t edit anything by ourselves at first. We contact the writers and ask them to make the necessary edits and changes. This is done to make sure the writers are informed of what is happening to their work and they can be a part of it as well. We do edit bios sometimes if they are too long; we edit if punctuation or grammar is not correct, but all is done by informing the writers accordingly.

Editing is not surgery, though some people treat it that way. I think of editing as a generative, creative process: my edits at every level of the manuscript are invitations to evolve. By the time a book is published, it should feel mature. It should fulfill all of its promise and be ready to be enjoyed by readers.

We are open to line editing and making editorial suggestions to authors whose works are very close to acceptance. Again, we are devoted to publishing both emerging and established voices, so yes, we want to encourage new voices by offering light editing at times. We proofread all work prior to publication in each issue. If we do make edits, authors at Forum do approve final edits. We do not provide an editing service for a fee. Yet, we may suggest an editor for an author to hire if they ask us about a professional editor work with, yet we do not profit in any way by making these suggestions.

All of these texts go though three stages of editing:
1. a structural edit
2. a copy / line edit
3. an advanced proof-read
After that the author is given a camera-ready copy to proof and after we have take on any suggestions from the author we do a final proof-read.

All pieces go through a thorough copy-edit and proof read, followed by an author proof-read of the camera-ready text and a further in-house proof-read. For this call we do not do a structural edit. We have already accepted the story as is and only accepted it because the structure is fine.

All of these texts go through three stages of editing:
1. a structural edit
2. a copy / line edit
3. an advanced proof-read
After that the author is given a camera-ready copy to proof and after we have take on any suggestions from the author we do a final proof-read. Some books are illustrated and we spend several weeks with the writer and the illustrator working on the pictures.

Depends on the story. All original fiction gets a line edit. If a deeper structural edit is needed we would suggest a revise and resubmit. The author always has the final say.

I use line editing, copy editing, and proofreading, then send the piece to the author for their approval of the edits.

We like to ask the owner of the work if they would like me to go over any mistakes (if I haven't noticed that there are any) and if they say yes, I'll do just that and send them back the copy for confirmation.

Accepted authors get an editorial pass with some developmental editing, copy editing, and proofs. Authors are sent final proofs before publication. Stories that need substantive editing would get an R&R from us, as our policy is if we buy the story it needs to be fairly close to publication ready as-is.

We don’t accept submissions that have critical grammatical errors. But after a piece is accepted, we read it thoroughly, edit it according to our style for consistency, and proofread it to make sure the publication will be the best it can be. If a contributor has a specific editing request, we will make those requests.

Depends on the manuscript some need more than others, some none at all. The author collaborates on the edits with the editor until consensus is achieved.

ergot. closely edits every piece - both proofreading and line edits - prior to publication.
The author has final say over all edits. Some work might get a few suggestions while others get a heavier treatment. It is not uncommon for the author to reject half or more of the suggested edits, but the hope is that the few that stick will improve the piece in a substantial way.
Feedback from authors about our editing process has been overwhelmingly positive.

A lot. We try to get to a place that the author is happy with changes, but we get the final word.

Due to the fast-turnaround times and frequent publications, we do not provide substantive editing for pieces in our monthly issues. If we do change anything, it will most likely be any grammatical discrepancies or typos. These are sent over to the author for approval prior to publication.

We expect the authors to have put forth their best effort before submitting an item, so we do not provide substantive editing. If the reading committee believes an item has merit but needs revision, we will suggest improvements and a short deadline that the author may or may not accept. Line editing and copy editing may be part of the final review. The author has the final approval of changes with the understanding that if they do not accept our proposed edits we may decline to publish. Proofreading is part of the vetting process and we take several passes over a piece before we go to press.

We go through a process of developmental editing, which includes line editing, copyediting, and sometimes suggestions for reshaping the manuscript but the key here is that all edits are merely suggestions. We trust the vision and voice of our writers and give them the final say about what goes into print.

We assume that the author was done with the piece when they submitted it, especially because a good deal of this work is computationally-produced. We're open to the aesthetics of the glitch, but we do provide feedback to authors who have pitched an idea and are thinking about the best way to express the concepts they're working with. The author *always* gets to approve the final version before we publish. The only major edits we'd provide, as I said before, are design ideas— I'm interested in using the affordances of our site builder, ReadyMag, to help the pieces stand out.

We copy edit and proofread all accepted work, and give authors time to review any changes before publication. If a piece requires substantial editing and proofreading, then it's clearly not ready for publication, and it's not accepted.

Usually very little "big picture" edits but almost always at least a proofread.

We provide substantive editing including at least one round each of developmental, line and copy edits.

We do not have a rule of thumb for editing. Each piece we publish is different and requires a different approach. Material that we schedule for publication is usually something we truly like and generally does not need much editing. We do not give authors final approval.

Editing is a sensitive task and requires openness on both the side of the author and editor. When we accept a piece we are accepting the author and their vision for their work. We will suggest revisions but the author will have the final say. The goal is always to make the work as strong and engaging as possible.

Given the aims of the journal, if we see potential in an author but the work still requires development, we would likely reach out to the author first to see if they would be willing to work with an editor to finalise the piece. If authors see this in good faith, this can be one of the most rewarding aspects of the publication.

Most work we publish doesn’t require much development work. Most of the line edits are to get the piece in-line with style requirements. But, around 10-15% of each issue goes through a much more intensive process as editors see something in someone or some story that isn’t quite ready yet and are happy to work with the author until the text feels right.

I edit prose very thoroughly, both with broad notes and a detailed line edit. There's also a final proof and copyedit with our production editor, Heidi Marschner. Sometimes writers push back a little at my more proscriptive suggestions, and that's fine—the writer has the final say. But, as a writer, there is nothing I find more flattering and generous than a strong edit, and most of our contributors seem to feel the same. Poetry, I think, is a little more take-it-or-leave-it, but if my poetry editors ask me to convey editorial notes to an accepted poet, I do so. Again, good writers tend to be open to changes, even if they don't ultimately accept them.

We do not edit heavily beyond grammatical/copy-edits and small tweaks that the author is aware of. We assume the writer has presented the work they are pleased with.

Basic proofreading and occasional line edit suggestions. Accepted pieces are likely to be 'publication ready'.

I do my best to catch typos and punctuation errors, and those I'll correct myself. If I come across continuity errors, awkward sentences, perhaps an omitted or misplaced word, etc., I'll contact the writer and point out those issues and allow them to revise and resubmit. I do have a couple non-native English speaking contributors and a couple creatively talented contributors with reading disabilities, and I will work with them to strengthen their writing, and often they allow me to go in and correct and revise whatever needs to be corrected, trusting I'll keep those rewrites in their voice, their style.

Oi, some of the manuscripts we select are so good and do not need a ton, but we still put it through rigorous editing. And then others are still in the development phase. We edit everything, and we do it several times.

We make very few edits to accepted pieces, and also give the authors a chance to submit revised versions after acceptance. I provide basic proofreading in addition to the copyediting by our fiction editor, which usually just catches punctuation mistakes (us writers really love sprinkling semicolons and em dashes!). Anything further than punctuation is approved by the author. If we think we love a piece but it requires much deeper editing, we may ask a writer to re-submit at a later time.

Ideally, we edit lightly or not at all. If the piece needs substantive editing, we ask for a revision.

Once a piece is accepted, our editorial team steps in to work on it. We usually begin with substantive editing, making sure the piece aligns with the overall vision and theme of the issue. We also focus on enhancing clarity, structure, and emotional impact, ensuring the work feels cohesive and polished. After that, we do line editing to refine the flow of the writing, followed by copy editing for grammar, punctuation, and consistency. Finally, we handle basic proofreading to catch any lingering errors. We always make sure the author has the chance to review and approve the final edits before publication.

If a story is good but doesn't get some aspect of the Empire quite right, I explain the problem and allow the author to make needed changes. The usual copy edits are also made. The author gets final approval.

I provide line editing and copy editing / proofreading. If a piece needs really substantive editing (rearranging sections and changing plot points, for example) it won’t be accepted, I’m afraid. The author (or poet) always gets to approve the final edits and ask questions / make suggestions.

Very little edits. Almost 100% of the pieces we accept are very well proofread. If they're not, we usually reject. For poetry, we do almost no editing, unless we find something like a typo or grammatical error. Short stories get more line/copy editing for errors and those are corrected prior to publication.

For copy editing and basic proofreading that includes typos and punctuation, we don't consult the authors. For anything grand, we consult authors. Occasionally, we suggest substantial rewrites and may rework the pieces with the author.

If a piece is accepted, we will work closely with the author and provide editing as needed, including substantive editing. We always proofread. Author gets to approve final edits.

It depends on the submission. It can be a minor copy-editing level, and we may get a draft which with the agreement of the author we transform into something else. Like a draft for one picture book, becomes two books, or maybe we think it's a better fit for an early reader. These bigger transformations are rare. Most of the time what we acquire is already 80-90% ready.

I view edits as a collaborative process (if edits are needed at all). There are occasionally small grammar edits or formatting edits that need to be made, and authors are sent proofs for approval before publication. If I have a question about a piece we want to publish, I'll ask. For the most part, our edits are basic proofreading.

Depends on the piece. There may be no edits at all. There may be a few quick line edits and clarifying questions. We may push a writer to explore a particular theme more and leave it up to them. Or we may suggest sweeping edits (and that of course depends on how interested the contributor is in changing their work).

The amount of editing necessary before sending a book to publication varies from project to project. In our publishing house, it is a collaborative effort between the editor and the author. The author is expected to approve the final manuscript before it goes to print.

Mostly just line edits. Yes, the author gets final approval. Instead of making edits myself, I prefer to send critiques to the author and I ask them to fix problem areas on their own.

Depends on the story. Some get published with maybe only a word or two altered. Others go through several rounds of labor intensive rewrites. If edits are required, we get author approval for everything except spelling, grammar, punctuation, or any other errors.

We try to run every change we make by the author or poet first. Some things seem obvious, but we try to make sure what we see as corrections aren't intentional. Very rarely do we offer editing. More rarely do we suggest taking the piece back to the drawing board or to workshop. We expect most submitters have already done this process and have submitted their final best. Most of our edits come with formatting for the web - especially with poetry (and plays). We try to keep the lines and spacing exactly as the poet submitted, but sometimes, it takes some fenagling. If submitters see any issues with published works, we happily fix or correct upon request.

We do not believe in accepting pieces that need many edits in our opinion. We believe that we should publish writing that is as true to authorial intent as possible and with this in mind, the onus of edits rests with the author during the few weeks post-acceptance in that we believe that writers know best. We do offer editing suggestions sometimes, but this is rare!

Not very much. We do a pass for grammar, spelling, typos, etc. We also look for logical inconsistencies or bad references (wrong character name, etc). All changes get sent to the author to approve or not.

We end up editing about a quarter of our accepted submissions. While we will correct small typos or formatting errors (think dialogue commas and numbers formatting) without any back and forth, substantive edits are passed on to the writer for review, discussion, and approval prior to publication. Writers are asked to review pieces prior to our standard social media promotion.

We do not edit submissions, but once a submission is accepted for publication, we give the author a chance to review and edit the piece as it will appear online.

We do very extensive workshopping, then line and copy editing. The author must approve, reject or modify everything.

Seldom.

For the most part, we provide line editing and copy editing to ensure the accepted stories and essays are free of any glaring mistakes and reads smoothly. On occasion, we do provide substantive editing through structural edits where we believe the piece could work harder at addressing its theme or thesis, but these edits are done in collaboration with the author. Final edits are approved by the editor-in-chief.

I copy edit each piece and then proofread again before publication. I find substantive editing with creative writers to not always be that successful, so if a piece needs a lot of work and looks like an early draft to me, I will decline it rather than embark on editing.

I edit around a third of the work we publish. I collaborate with writers and leave final approval to them.

It depends on the piece. We will reach out to the author and work closely to arrive at a version that works for us and them.

Sometimes we provide intense editing sometimes no editing at all, maybe just proofreading. Always, always an author is given final approval of edits.

We may edit typos or make small corrections related to commas, spelling, and grammar. However, with poems, we typically assume that each choice was made intentionally so we are much less likely to assume a piece needs a correction unless the writer confirms that.

If we notice any minor, mechanical errors, we correspond with the contributor about corrections. Otherwise, we prefer to maintain the writer’s vision.

It depends. If we see a lot of promise in a piece, but think it needs significant work, we are more likely to engage in one to three rounds of edits. This most often happens with nonfiction work. For fiction, we edit less, but will sometimes ask for clarification. Same with poetry. All pieces are line edited.

We strive to provide and adhere to author's desires when offering edits. Edits beyond formatting and grammar are rarely suggested. Authors are always consulted , informed about and shown all the edits as suggestions - and we welcome their input.
It is important to us to showcase our submitter's creations exactly as they want to, in their voice.
We likewise send digital proof copies of the upcoming issue 2 weeks before it is due to go live and work with creators then on any desirable or suggested edits, both graphic design and content-wise. We feel like making this our process helps our contributors, because they get to see their original work on a page, instead of a hypothetical draft.

Depends on the submission, but probably moderately-to-heavily. We are looking for competent storytellers who come to us with a high-quality product, but there is always room to improve. While we do not have the resources to shepherd a writer through a total rewrite, if we are impressed we might give some advice and invite them to resubmit at a later date.

We do basic proofreading and some copy editing to correct unintentional errors in otherwise strong pieces. We ask our writers to approve final edits. If we think a piece needs a more substantial edit, we might make some general suggestions and ask them to resubmit.

It depends entirely on how much editing a piece requires. We've bought some books that were basically perfect the way they were -- a few typos to fix and that's it. We've also had books where I had to revise literally every sentence -- a little or a lot, but every sentence needed something. It happens. Nothing wrong or right about either situation. If a book is good enough to publish, it has something precious about it. But some gems need polishing and setting. Of course in the end the amount of editing an author is willing to accept is up to him or her. But if I feel a book requires editing and the author isn't receptive, we're not the right publisher for that author. That said, most authors are glad to get the editing help if their book can be made stronger by it.

Barely, if at all. We'd rather reject your work outright than tamper with it.

Basic proofreading. We do give specific feedback when we feel that a story has something to return to but for the most part our rejection process is based on a limited number of slots since we are a micro publication at the moment.

After accepting a piece, the only edits made are typos or grammatical/spelling errors, and then, only with the author’s/artist’s permission. We may ask an author or artist to consider making specific changes before accepting a piece.

I don't edit an author's work. I expect them to have a completed story when they submit it.

We do minor edits and always ask our contributors if that's okay with them.

Very little. We expect each piece to be edited and revised by the author. We will fix obvious typos or mispellings, but that's about it.

All writers who submit work to Annulet, creative or critical, should expect the possibility of line or developmental edits, as well as copy editing and proofreading. Whether or not you receive any substantive edits, or if you go through multiple rounds, has no bearing on the value or quality of your work. Some pieces are intricately edited, which is a collaborative process with the text and author that I love to undertake. The goal with any edit is to ensure that the piece is in its best possible form for readers before it is published, which is distinct from whatever preference for it I may have of my own. I work with authors' styles, approaches, and even their own relationship to syntax and grammar to find a balance of clarity and particularity. The last stage of the editing process is final agreement with my recommendations, queries, or edits with the author, who has final approval. Authors also receive proofs for their own proofreading before publication, usually a week or so in advance.

Definitely proofreading, as well as line editing and copy editing. I don't deal with developmental editing, but if something doesn't read right, I'll call it out and ask for a change. The author definitely gets to approve, as it is his work, and he has to be happy with the results.

We proofread closely and do light editing of obvious errors. Rarely, we make suggestions for small content changes with the author retaining final approval. We trust that the author has worked extensively on the pieces, so we stay true to the author's vision as much as possible.

At Mulberry, we believe the first rule of editing is "to do no harm." In editing, our utmost and only goal is the clarity of the piece. We try our hardest to change as little as possible, but copy-editing and line editing for grammar, punctuation, spelling, and/or confusing wording is our priority. A week before any issue is published, writers and artists receive an edited copy of their work. They have final say in all that we do with their piece.

Quite a bit if necessary. If the core of the piece is a desire of ours - and the writing shows that spark, we are willing to go pretty far to meet the author half-way, all with the writer's approval of course.

We generally try to avoid any substantive edits, especially considering the short length of our submissions. However, any copy edits or proofreading suggestions we make are always confirmed with our authors before publication.

I started SWING with The Porch because I love to edit. I love the one to one connection with a promising writer and the opportunity it gives to engage with art. So the answer is yes, we at SWING provide substantive editing if need be, and most certainly line and copy editing. After acceptance there will be a round of sometimes developmental editing, sometimes tweaking, with me or with Susannah Felts; the author will get to review proof; and the entire issue is read by a proofreader outside of the office with fresh eyes.

There is no one, definitive answer to this question. Generally, I look for pieces that are (mostly) ready for publishing. However, submitters should know that if they fall into the camp of writers who feel every word they have written is sacrosanct, and that an editor has no business doing actual editing, then there might be other publications better suited to them. The author always gets to approve final edits, and I'm open to a dialogue in those cases where disagreement arises. In most of those cases, I tend to lean toward accommodating the author.

When a piece is accepted, the author signs a contract that says we will not make any major changes aside from basic proofreading without email consent of the author. If there are major changes we would like to see we try to open up a conversation with the author and tell them our reasons why we think the piece would improve with the edits. Sometimes they agree right away, other times it takes a couple back and forths until we reach something we’re both happy with. We have had one or two people withdraw their submissions rather than make any changes. At the end of the day it is the author’s work.

We do basic proofreading. We aren't here to help you develop your writing. It should be in its final draft before it's submitted to us. We will only correct grammatical errors and let the writer know before doing so.

It depends on the piece. Some pieces are publication ready. But most works require a bit more attention from the author. Sometimes it’s at the word or sentence level. Every once in a while, we will make suggestions about an ending or a beginning.

In general, we are looking for pieces of writing that do not contain major editing, grammatical, or any other major errors. However, we always work together with the authors to fix minor issues, so they have the biggest say in how the final version looks - after all, they are the real owners of the work!

We do edit all pieces for correctness, clarity, conciseness, consistency, and conformity to the Chicago Manual of Style and our house dictionary, all while retaining the author's voice and style. This editing always includes a mechanical edit and will sometimes include substantive editing as well. We send our authors the copyedited piece with track changes and queries before we send it to our typesetter (recommending they read it in Simple Markup in Word when possible). After typesetting, the issue is proofread by the entire staff and the authors, and they can fix any mistakes or typos then.

All accepted pieces will undergo a minimum of editing to meet our "house style" and standards. We expect such proofing-level edits to stand, but deeper edits are always subject to the approval of the author. If we anticipate significant revision, we will discuss and agree on the process in advance. In some cases, we will invite authors to rewrite based on feedback.

We don't do much substantive editing thanks to the standard of authors who submit to us. If we're keen on a submission which has a few issues, we'll deal with them in collaboration with the author. We do carry out line editing, copy editing and proofreading. Authors are always given the opportunity to approve any suggested changes to the text.

We suggest editing for some pieces and print others without changing a comma. Our aim is always to make the story shine.
If we believe that some editing would be beneficial, we suggest it to the author, who then decides. Nothing is published without the artists' approval - we send proofs and keep in touch with all our contributors throughout the process.

With some blog posts, I occasionally ask for a ground-up rewrite. Sometimes more than one. For our contest entries, there is usually little to no editing to be done. I might suggest changing a word or rearranging a sentence. If there is more editing needed, they wouldn't have made it onto the shortlist. (Yes, the author gets to approve the final edits.)
As an editing firm, separate from our contests (we don't accept contest entries for manuscripts we've worked on), we do offer everything from developmental editing to proofreading to beta reading.

If a piece does not require a lot of editing, we will work with the author. If the author refuses edits than its not meant to be in our collection. We will not edit a piece without the author's approval.

We'll happily tidy up, noting hilarious typos and Freudian slips then begrudgingly asking the author if we can correct them. We *have* worked closely with authors to refine substantial portions of their texts. This collaboration is a beautiful, exhausting process. It's very wonderful and we try never to do it.

We conduct a two-month editorial process with every publication. Contest winners, however, are edited very lightly in order to uphold the integrity of the judge's decisions.

It depends on the work. For prose, we always do a close proofread and sometimes request other sentence-level edits. The majority of the poetry is published as submitted. The few times we have requested edits it's normally for poems that use very long lines or deeply indented formatting, which we sometimes need to edit simply so they'll fit on our issue pages. Any edits we make are sent to the authors for approval before publication.

We do basic proof reading to ensure there are no syntactical and grammatical errors. However, if there is any editing done, we make sure to run it by the writer before publishing it.

I do substantive edits on all accepted pieces, which authors then approve.

I preffer to not change a writers work therefore what I publish is thier vision.
I will change or correct a mistake if I notice it.
But I do not believe it is my place or job, to tell people how they should write.
I either accept or pass on work.
And if I can fix something I do so without making a preduction about it.
But I never change anything without a writers permission.

We are minimalists re: editing, maybe something only a little more that proofreading. Every once and a while, we may make a suggestion for the sake of clarification, but it's rare, and only if we really like a piece.

As per our submission requirements, we'll make small adjustments such as spelling corrections and punctuation edits without asking for author approval. We have, in the past, reached out to authors for permission to make more substantive edits. Those have been mostly related to word choice, more in-depth punctuation issues, and line breaks.

For all submissions (especially for long-form writing), we provide feedback that involves both editor and the writer. Editing is not just an isolated practice. Beyond general proofreading for correction of errors, we communicate with the writer to get their feedback on areas that we think could be strengthened. We also share with writers about things we especially like throughout their pieces. Editing for us is a respectful conversation between the Portrait of New England team and the writer.

This also depends entirely on the piece itself. The author always has final approval.

We have published pieces exactly as they were submitted, and we have worked with authors on much more extensive edits. That process is negotiated between author and editor, and we take care that both parties are happy with the work involved and with the result.

Accepted submissions are proofread, and we make line edits, but we don't accept submissions that would need substantive editing. We want to avoid altering a writer's work so much that it loses their style. If we receive a submission we like, but find it needs heavy edits, then we would send a rejection encouraging future submissions. When it comes to writers just starting out, heavy-handed editing can do more harm than good.

A story has to be nearly perfect before we buy it. We do copyedit and proofread, but we don't do a lot of line editing. I don't want to edit out the author's voice. Occasionally I will see a story that I love but feel needs some substantive work and I will go back to the author with my thoughts and ask for a second version. We don't send back the story for the author's approval of the copyediting.

We will correct obvious typos without consulting the author. Although if it's a novel excerpt, we will tell the writer so they can correct their manuscript. We may have questions about a sentence or about phrasing. If we don't like something about the narrative we may request a change. We expect submissions to be pub ready. If there are more than a couple of corrections needed, or if there are major issues with the writing, the piece will be declined.

I'll inform a writer of any major changes, or ask if these changes can be made to accommodate my editorial preferences in order to publish the work. That said, for the most part, if it needs major changes it's not finished yet. Typos happen and I don't get hysterical about them, within reason. Human error happens and I accommodate it because you will no doubt accommodate mine. That said, sloppy, unedited manuscripts are not welcome. We do get submissions from people around the world writing in English who have another first language, and I think this is bold. If the piece fits, I'll invest some time in minor edits. I try to avoid changes that are not required but simply suit my personal preference. I respect authors' work, intentions, and creative choices.

I edited one piece for nearly six months before we all felt it was finished.

Generally speaking, we don't.

Editing honestly depends on the story. We prefer stories that require minimum effort. However, if there is an amazing story buried under poor grammar or sentence structure, we're willing to put in the effort to get more eyes on it!

We copy edit for spelling, and grammar and typos, but check if the writer is using an unusual spelling or grammar by choice. We proofread before the layout and after the layout. We occasionally make a suggestion to a writer on a line. We would like to receive the best and final version of the poem rather than be sent rewrites. We always check with an author if there needs to be a change (or potential change) for anything.

Not much. It should be print ready. We do sometimes engage with authors.

It depends on what the particular piece needs.

We usually select pieces that are already in excellent shape. We do share galleys with our authors but do not allow major edits that late into production.

Since our staff is made up of student volunteers, we have a policy of only accepting pieces that do not need more than basic formatting, grammar, and copy editing. Occasionally, we will make an exception if one of our editors truly loves a piece so much that they will volunteer to work with the writer.

We edit. The author approves all final edits.

Most of the time, we decline a piece that we feel needs editing (we often give feedback). Once in a while, when we love everything about a piece except maybe the last line, the first line, etc. we'll take it. Once in a long while, if the piece has been translated from a rare language, we'll work with the translator on line edits. But this is an exception rather than a rule.

We don't do much editing. And we are generally not happy when a poet sends us an "improved" version of a poem we liked. If a poem springs from a genuine impulse, the original word choice is usually best. On rare occasions we see a possibility of improvement and make a suggestion. We don't make changes without the author's consent.

I'm a light touch editor. It there are too many typos or other errors, I move on to the next submission.

We edit and redact to the benefit of the mss which is the ultimate benefit to the reader. Yes, we ALWAYS get final edit approval from the author and at that point we make any further additions or corrections requested by the author.

Generally, we do not get involved in editing. If we accept a piece we ask the submitter to review, revise and proofread (as needed) their submission and return a final perfected draft. If there are substantive edits based on taste, choice, vision etc... we may let the submitter know the piece still needs work - wary of imposing our vision on the artist's - and invite them to edit and resubmit. If there are minor edits beyond proofreading that we think would help clarify a scene, we would suggest it, but acceptance would not hinge on the submitter's acceptance of our suggestions. We have been asked on numerous occasions to provide substantive editing but unfortunately, as a non-profit/non-income venture, we simply don't have the resources.

Generally each piece will go through multiple rounds of edits which include substantive suggestions along with line editing and copy editing. Authors always approve final edits before publication.

We edit for grammar and word choice, and the author has the option to approve or reject all suggestions. If we accept a piece, that means we like it as-is, and any suggestions for improvement are optional.

It always depends...If we are taken with something of substance but see the need for some edits, we write to the author and suggest the changes or additions. Sometimes we do this editing ourselves and send the result to the author for approval. Poems seldom are edited, and usually are sent out for approval in proof form.

It depends on the piece. Sometimes we edit nothing except for a light copy-edit, and sometimes we spend weeks with a writer. For our international folks: we don't change to American spellings! So you'll get to see your work in print in an American journal exactly as you wrote it. One of our favourite ( ;) )things is hearing the happiness from our international contributors when they realize we use their spellings.

It depends. Most of the stories I accept tend to be very polished and require only light proof-texting. There are some stories though that require more edits and we work with the author on that. Edits that are substantial are seen as not ready for publication--those I would send back to the author as rewrite requests. It's important to note that rewrite requests from us are not considered acceptances. If we like the story, we'll send suggestions on how to make the story stronger. For the most part, many authors who address our suggestions turn a good story into a 'WOW' story, in which case, we buy it.

We provide editing on all levels, from basic proofreading to major edits, in order to make the piece the best we think it can be. Accepted authors should expect several rounds of revision. Most of the time, our edits are suggestions, and the author has the final say; usually, authors are grateful for our feedback and agree with our suggestions.

We always do copy editing and basic proofreading. If we believe strongly in a piece, but feel it needs work before we can publish it, we will work closely with the writer to complete substantive editing. The author gets to approve final edits only if the edits are beyond basic spelling, grammar, and punctuation.

It depends entirely on what the book needs. Some books need considerable developmental editing; some need something more like a strenuous copy edit. But all books go through an edit before publication. The author gets final approval, of course - it's their book, and this is a collaboration.

As mentioned previously, we aim to accept pieces we feel are generally publication-ready, as we don't see it as our broad editorial role to heavily reshape the author's work. That said, we occasionally accept work we feel excited about but want to offer more substantive edits on, or suggest a resubmission. We always line edit, copyedit, and proofread, and the author approves final edits and is notified when the piece is posted on our site before it's promoted publicly.

We do minor edits. We simply do not accept pieces that need major edits. We do not have the time for it.

Everyone on our staff is also a writer, so we understand the editing process can be a mixed bag. Most writers are submitting something they consider finished, and they might feel strongly about making subsequent edits. I don’t want to put a writer in the position where we suggest a substantive change that they disagree with, but feel inclined to agree with for the sake of publication. This means we’ve sometimes declined pieces that we really liked but felt needed some larger change.We have a copy editing process to clean up anything grammatical and sometimes for style consistency. We will pose questions or make suggestions on a thematic or narrative level, but we stress to our writers that these are suggestions, and they can take or leave them.I don’t care about the odd typo or grammatical error in the submission pile. These are easy to fix and not necessarily indicative of the work as a whole, though an excessive amount can point to a piece not being ready for submission. We get called Invisible Cities all the time. Again, this is not important to me or our readers if you’ve sent us a banger.

Publishing is a collaboration between the author and our team. We provide substantive editing - soy edits, line and copy edits, and proofreading. The author always gets to approve all edits, as they are done in collaboration with them.

Only editing is for grammar. Better send your best because that's what's being sent out to the world if you're accepted. If there is a major mistake in action or plot, author will be notified for clarification.

The author always gets the last word. We edit according to how much a piece needs. That could be line editing, more, or less.

I try to keep a light hand on the work after acceptance. Previous to acceptance and contract, I may suggest certain edits and rewrites to make the work more acceptable to our publication needs. However, once the contract is made, editing is a collaborative effort between the author/artist and myself. Any editing I provide, as per the contract, is at the expense of the publisher, not the author/artist.

We don't do a lot of editing of our winners. Our editor works with the author if they are one of the winners being published in the book.

We only do basic proofreading. The submitter is expected to submit a thoroughly edited manuscript.

We rarely edit a piece prior to being accepted for publication. Coin-Operated Press is run by 2 people, and so we lack to capacity to edit submissions at this time. We usually receive around 60-70 submissions per zine, every month - and we only have space for about 50 pieces to be included. If we particularly like a piece, but notice it needs some edits, we will contact the creator to provide the edits, within a week of the submission deadline, to be included in our zine. We encourage all submitters to proof-read, and provide high-quality images of their work, at the initial submission stage, to ensure we are more likely to accept your work.

Depends.

Radon believe in a close collaboration between editor and author. Radon editors hold numerous graduate degrees and are published themselves, so we offer free professional editing to all our authors and patrons. We aim to offer the most suggestions possible to an author during the editing stage so that they can create the most polished version of their work. We stress that the author is able to reject any and every edit we make. At the end of the day we understand they are the author of their own work and should have ultimate say.

Our major line about this is one that I first heard when I was first submitting to magazines myself: "If we didn't already love your story, we wouldn't have selected it." I'm not a big supporter of super-intensive editing. While I understand its utility for books or extended essays, I don't think it makes sense either for the author or for us, the editors, in flash0fiction. There's no way to change a few major elements of the piece without basically transforming it into a different piece, which we're not interested in doing. If we have major hangups about a piece, we usually just choose to accept another piece. If we choose a piece, it's because we love it as is. We edit to make sure the piece is logically clear, and we change a few words or phrases to make the piece more sharp and lucid. We consult authors about significant changes, and we're always willing to listen to author input about even minor changes. But I must emphasize that if we choose your piece, it means we love about 99% of it already.

This entirely depends on the piece itself, but I work on the basis of falling in love. If I love a piece as it is then it will remain unchanged, whereas if I love the idea of a piece but the craft requires refinement then the edits can be substantial. Any revisions other than the smallest of corrections will be discussed and agreed with the author, and where extensive work is required the piece may go back and forth several times. That said, I expect a submission to be of publishable quality whether it requires edits or not.

It depends. Most of the time, the edits are simple, but sometimes, I'll ask an author to re-work a section of their story. Sometimes, I'll offer editing suggestions. Authors ALWAYS have final approval.

I won't accept a story if I feel it needs substantive editing, although if I really like the conceit of a story and I think it has a lot of promise, I'll reach out to an author to do a rewrite-and-resubmit. Once a story has been accepted, I'll work with them on line edits, and after those, the piece will be examined by our copy editor. The author gets to approve any and all of these edits. After everything has been formatted, we'll pass the work along to a proofreader, who will make only the most cursory of fixes.

For the purposes of the contests I administer, I look only at proofreading, since the piece has to already be edited and highly polished to be selected as a winner or notable piece.

We consider an author or poet's work theirs except for minor changes that are agreed upon in writing.

A lot of attention has been given to brazenly raw writing in the previous issues. To receive a work that says something crucial to the forward movement of social justice with an authentic voice is incredibly attractive to LEJ!

Most of the pieces I accept require very little editing. When I do suggest edits, I use a light touch. The author does get to approve final edits. Mostly what I suggest is line or copy editing. Proofreading comes when I'm proofing the final stages (the proofs, as it were). Every serious publisher does this, I believe. It's our job to make sure our authors' work is showcased in its best light. Spacing issues or misplaced periods are our responsibility. I do send these proofreads to authors if they want to see it.

We may make some minor, line-level edits after proofreading, but very rarely will we ask for major revisions. If we accept a piece, it's usually because we love it as is. We always send writers a proof to review before their work is published online.

We support accepted authors all the way through our publication process. Every accepted piece is edited and proofread. Any editor will make suggestions to strengthen a story, but ultimately the story is always the author's.

We will edit for grammar, spelling, and some light fact-checking, but we expect submissions to be a polished product. There are some quirks to our house style guide which may require corrections such as no colons or semi-colons (we feel they are so formal as to momentarily disrupt the reader), and we use a .22" indent. These style guide quirks are never a reason for rejection. We'll simply make the changes.

Not much. We want perfect pieces.

If I have to change a story substantially, then it becomes my story rather than the original author's, so editing is kept to a minimum. If any changes, apart from correcting spelling errors or reformatting the odd sentence, are necessary, I would advise the author.

Depends on the piece, but we often provide substantive editing. Multiple editors read and edit a piece prior to publication, and we work collaboratively with the author to ensure everyone is happy and proud of the final product.

This will vary from editor to editor. I keep saying that, I know—but it's the truth. Every editor has her own way of working with her writers. Most of our editors will work closely with the authors whose work is accepted and will suggest substantive edits, and yes, authors approve the final draft. Once a piece makes it way to me, we typically don't send back copyedits for site style and grammar, but substantive edits always require author approval.
Unfortunately, we cannot offer editing or thoughts on work that is not accepted for publication. Because our editorial staff is all-volunteer, they just don't have the time.

Very little, and NEVER without the author's approval.

It varies, but if your manuscript requires significant editing you will not be offered a contract.

We have a very collaborative editing process. Our editors make suggestions and comments on writing pieces through Google Docs. We give our accepted creators the option of accepting our suggestions or commenting back the reason why they do not want to make those changes. Our short stories editor even hops on the phone with each of our story or script writers to discuss more in-depth revisions when needed.
Our visual and multimedia editors reach out to their accepted creators with any edits regarding lighting, sound, or overall image/video quality. These edits can also be disputed if there is an artistic reasoning behind certain lighting, sound, or quality choices.

Damn little.

We don't edit ourselves, that would not be ethical in a competition, but we may ask successful entrants to correct errors and resubmit before publication.

A substantial majority of our published prose receives detailed edits in addition to copyediting.

Almost every short story needs a little editing. A couple of words to fix here and there is not a biggy. If it's worthy but filled with a lot of errors, the writer will be given a second chance to resubmit. We are not snarky at all.

Everything is individual. I can count on two hands the writers whom I've never had to edit at all. Some writers I do substantive editing. And, for sure - I never accept work I've edited without author permission. I send it back to the author as suggestions, and they get final say. Sometimes they come back with even better improvements, sometimes they accept the eits, and sometimes they simply reject the edits. In all cases I work very hard to maintain the authors words - meaning I never add words - I usually simply delete words. It's all good. Many writers are grateful to see their work, and there are a few who have conniption fits because someone dared to suggest their work wasn't perfect. And it's all good. I love you all for having the guts and the determination to send your work out to the world to be inspected and rejected time and time again. If not for you, mags like Cholla Needles wouldn't exist. And I'd be an old drunk instead of an editor. So, bless you for blessing me every day with your work!

Each piece goes through at least one round of editing. I will do the edits on some of the books, and I contract editing out to a person I trust for other works. It all just depends on what is going on at the time and how much time/money I have at my disposal. As far as what gets edited in each piece, it depends. Generally speaking, each book will go through line edits, copy edits, and proofreading. However, there have been times that a book has gone through substantive editing. The author reviews and approves all edits that take place on their piece.

It entirely depends on the type of submission we receive. Sometimes, it's flawless and fit for publishing in our anthology but other times it requires substantive editing and minor changes. Submissions with major changes are often discarded since we cannot afford the time to do the edits.
Once we're done with our editing process, we wait for the author to approve the final edits before including them in our anthologies.

Again, it varies wildly. Every work goes through some editing, and it may be very mild, to correct errors and align the work with the magazine's style or it may be major, including expanding or cutting the length to improve the story. That's a big decision on my part for which I have to consider both the work and the writer's wishes. Some people don't want to be edited and I understand that, so if I'm considering a major edit I reach out to the writer and explain that I'd like to accept the work if such and such is done and often, here are my suggested edits. So far, I've received nothing but gratitude from writers who recognize I'm trying help their work shine as much as it possibly can and that's very gratifying to me personally, that they recognize the value I'm trying to add.

We give pretty detailed edits on essays and fiction, but always with the author's consent. I've had a few pieces that I've done very little with, and recently one where the author more or less rewrote the entire piece and it ended up great. I think the thing to remember is that we are looking for reasons to publish your work. We try to see the best in it, or what it can be. Sometimes it doesn't work. We used to do multiple rounds of edits with writers, but we learned if it's not working after the first one, it probably won't work with more effort and just ends up getting frustrating for everyone.
Even if we reject an essay or short story, we want to let the writers know why. We are all writers too, and we want to be the editors we wish we were submitting to.

Reed Magazine prioritizes pieces that need little to no content editing. We query authors about content edits, and otherwise copyedit using the Chicago Manual of Style.

Cavar: Sometimes, we go through several rounds of revisions with an author before a piece is published. Often, we'll make some brief copy-edits (typos, punctuation), and sometimes we'll publish a piece exactly as-is. We have limited resources for detailed revision, so edits are usually the latter types.

We edit very little. We expect that the work we received has been self-edited and reviews and is ready for publication.

We rarely edit our pieces. If we do, it is basic proofreading to ensure that the author's intentions are fully captivated and understood by the reader, especially when it comes to poetry or prose. The author always gets the final approval in their piece.

An author will get to approve edits. How many edits there are is entirely dependent on the book. But we like to work closely with out writers if we feel it will help their work.

Very minor changes if ever. If I feel adjustments should go beyond editorial license I will alert the writer. Unlike other publications Ariel Chart has a Return Category which is different than Accept or Reject. We use it for good poems that have boring titles or good poems that have a mangled word or line. Once corrected the poem might be Accepted.

Once a story has reach our semi-finals or finals, chances are it doesn't need a lot of editing. If there are small bumps in the storytelling or typos/grammar issues, we will let the author know and suggest the changes we would like to see before publication. The first-place author sees the final layout before anthology publication and has a chance to proofread and make any changes necessary with the approval of the anthology editor(s).

We proofread for spelling and grammar errors and make occasional small fixes to ensure clarity, but do so with the intent to keep the authors voice and style intact. At this time we do not get author approval for final edits as our schedule does not permit it.

This depends on the piece. For a magazine essay, there may be limited editing. But a full-length book will likely receive a developmental edit and copyedits if needed. We always work with our authors on edits and they have the ultimate say. We consider publishing to be a collaborative process.

We do line edits. We check for grammar or spelling errors. Nothing we accept ever needs huge edits. If it does need something beyond a few line edits we consult with the author. But because we are a small team, we tend not to accept things that need big edits. We just don't have the capacity to make those changes.

We line edit and proof read but also contextual and historical fact checking is really important. An author has to pay a lot of attention to those details to be successful in Holmes writing and our editor is a six time, award winning Holmes writer in his own right so there's lots of help on that front.

Hopefully not at all. Only if our editors absolutely love a piece will we volunteer to copy edit it before publication. We may ask for a revision & resubmission if it would require too much time & effort.

In most cases, we treat writers' work with a light hand. We'll treat a piece with proof reading and grammar and style edits. We may, at our discretion, perform some line edits. However, if we think a piece requires substantive edits, we will work with the author to ensure their vision and voice is maintained. Remember, we're writers, too, and in an ideal world, every piece would get full author approval before publication. However, we just can't dedicate the time and resources and have to rely on our editors' expertise and discretion for edits that don't change meaning, vision, or voice. Of course, if a writer expresses a desire to review edits before publication, we usually can accommodate; however, this is not a matter of policy and is always at the editor's discretion.

The author should send error-free work. There are occasions where the story is so good that substantive editing will be provided. All contributors do get to proof their work before we publish.

We do substantive, line, copy edits as well as basic proofreading on pieces after negotiating the quality of the content.
After our editing, we send to the contributors to accept or reject our recommendations. Then, we file for publication.

Very little. I'll correct grammatical errors with the author's permission. Basically our top pieces are publishable as is.
If you'd like help getting pieces ready for other competitions, take a look at our Manuscript Consultation section at https://writeradvice.com/manuscript-consultation/. We ask you not to submit the pieces we've worked on to our contest because it's a onflict of interest and the work will lack freshness for us.

After a piece is selected for publication, we give the author an opportunity to update their piece. (Very few authors take us up on this offer!) We ourselves do very little substantive editing; we prefer to have the author's voice shine through as unfiltered as possible.

A light mechanical copy edit at most, all subject to author's approval.

Because we have a small staff, we’re not set up to do extensive edits; we expect that submitted pieces be as close to ready as they can be. Occasionally, an editor will suggest changes to an author, and we do correct the odd error of punctuation, spelling, and the like. The contributor does see and approve the final edits.

Authors always get the final say, for sure, and we don’t conditionally accept pieces. You can veto every last tiny tweak, and we’ll still be happy to run your piece. With that dynamic established, know that we won’t hold back if we have a great idea for you. On the light-touch end, we might dance around a few commas and challenge a word choice or two. Sometimes we might want to cut a paragraph. Other times we’ll invite you to flesh out something that has energy but isn’t peaking quite right.
Almost nobody is worse off after a caring and attentive edit, and we want to help push your piece as far as it can possibly go. If you disagree, you’ll get to practice defending your vision and asserting your aesthetics.

Depends. Most times we edit something it is really just a bump here or there. Word choice, maybe drop a line. Nothing big.
The more you change the more it sounds like you and the less it sounds like the original work so what's the point?
Spelling, typos, and punctuation we just fix. For any changes we ask permission from the author and are happy to
discuss alternatives.

Our editors work closely with writers to edit and prepare their pieces for publication in their best form. Depending on the piece, editors may suggest more substantial editing, but often they merely suggest minor structural or line edits. Once a writer has reviewed and approved these preliminary edits, the piece is then copyedited and sent back to the writer for final approval before publication.

We proof-read without author approval. However, if we have any bigger suggestions than fixing typos or errant punctuation, we always seek author approval. We try not to change a piece too much but we do offer suggestions.
(If you use the word 'suddenly', more than likely we'll gently suggest you don't need it.)

Though we don't generally have time in our production schedule to work with each author on substantial content edits, we do send recommended copyedits to each accepted author and give them the chance to approve (or reject) copyedits. Occasionally, if a submission is exceptionally promising but has some issues that could be resolved with relatively easy content edits, we will engage an author in discussion about content edits.

We do not have time for developmental edits, though on occasion have broken this rule to include content that our team believed told an important story. Because we are receiving more and more content, we can look for pieces that need minimal edits. However, if a piece really moves us, our team is willing to work with the author to get it up to publication standards. Our authors approve final edits, our managing editor then does a copy edit, and authors are given a second opportunity to approve any suggested changes. Our goal is to ensure authors put their best work out via Please See Me for their own portfolio of excellence, as well as to keep our literary standards high.

Our editorial collective might accept a piece exactly as it is or request substantial revision. However, once it is accepted, it also goes through a rigorous copy editing process. We keep our work in line with the Chicago Manual of Style, 14th Ed. and the Merriam Webster Dictionary, 11th Ed. (although we do take into account poetic license in certain grammatical and conventional choices). In both cases, the author is ALWAYS notified of the proposed changes and must sign off on any modifications before the piece goes to print.

If we like the core of a story, for instance, if we find it is a diamond in the rough, we do engage in quite a lot of editing.

I always proofread, occasionally copy edit, and rarely do more substantive editing.

For reasons of our limited staff, we do a very little editing of material that comes to us. We feel the writer and poet have carefully composed their work and we don't have the resources to advise changes. So, except for proofreading, if they are accepted, a writer or poet's work will appear in the journal as is.

We do basic proofreading. We don't alter poetry unless there's some clear grammatical error which is inconsistent with the established style. The most we typically do is correct spelling errors in prose or bios.

We copy-edit to fit house style (UK spelling, for example), unless an author specifically asks us not to. Authors get to review and correct typeset proofs, and any proofreader queries are passed on to authors for resolution.

If an author or poet has submitted work that’s ‘nearly there’ for publication and which we would love to see published we will discuss minor edits rather than large structural changes. We do offer chargeable full editorial services via our website, separate to the submission process.

A line edit for author approval can be substantive if required.

We proofread and quite lightly edit accepted pieces, mainly to fix typos or improve clarity. Of course, the author has a say in the process.

We edit everything that appears in the magazine, sometimes quite heavily. Our aim is to make the piece more concise and clearer to our readers. Authors have final approval on any and all changes.

We expect writers and artists to send us their most polished work. We are also very careful readers and editors who engage closely with the details of what we publish. Our primary interest is always to print the best version of the work we accept, not necessarily in the precise form it was submitted. For pieces that are especially exciting, we might do more extensive edits. In this case, we work closely with authors and poets, who always have the final say on what is published.

Generally, we do not edit pieces. We want them to be fully formed upon arrival.

It depends on the submission. I mostly focus on grammar errors or spelling checks, but if there is a line or topic I’m not sure about, I reach out to the writer so I don’t want to misconstrue their work. We always want to make sure that our contributors have the final say in how their work is set out for publication.

Authors get to approve final edits. But as the publisher, I also get to not publish it until it reads the way I want it to read. So an author doesn't have to accept my editorial suggestions, but then I don't have to publish it either. So it's a stalemate until someone (like the author) bends. If the work is very rough, I won't take it as it will need too many edits and that's too time consuming. But if I think that it has potential, I'll line edit it carefully. All our books are carefully copyedited and proofread before publication.

We do minimal or no editing.

Always more editing than the author wants! (That's a joke. Simmer down.)

Anywhere from lightly to heavily, though the latter comes only when I look at a manuscript for a second time.

We try to remain hands-off, but we will edit for grammar, spelling, and syntax errors.

It really depends on the piece, but we prefer as little editing as possible—we really look for pieces that are just about perfect. Each piece gets copy edited and proofed a few times. We reserve the right to correct typos, punctuation, and Chicago style without consulting the writer, but if a sentence, word, or paragraph needs changing or adjustment, then we work with them so that both parties are happy—and in that case, yes, the writer gets final approval.

We work with authors quite a bit if we see potential!

Depends on the piece. When we really like the piece, but we feel that part of it needs some significant changes, we are happy to offer the input and work with the writer.

We prefered to do basic edits such as spellcheck and grammatical errors. We tend to avoid rearranging sentence and story structure as it takes too much of our time to do this substantial editing.

with most cases our editing is light... but sometimes, esp. if the pce is an english translation, esp. if it's an older english translation, then line editing & copy editing is called for.
& proofreading, that fucker never goes away.
we let authors know of edits as we go along, & always let the author know at the outset that edits may have to be done without their consent.
we've only had few authors who weren't happy, but we did resolve that, & they have continued to contribute.

CRES seeks to work with authors to improve stories we’d like to publish. The extent a story is edited lies with our Editor-in-chief. This could range from developmental edits to minor copy and line-edits. Authors get to approve final edits.

We do very little editing and nothing beyond a spelling correction without communicating to the author. Our editors occasionally make suggestions that can strenghthen a poem or story and if a decision hangs in the ballance, we work with the author. Our most common request for an edit is for a poet to change the order of stanza or to delete a final line. It's amazing how often we write beyond the end of poem.

I usually do a basic proofreading, and then we allow the author to view his/her work, and voice any concerns, before our issue goes live. Every once in awhile, I will ask an author to edit something specific, prior to its official acceptance. In very few instances, I do line editing of a piece after its accepted because I think the story itself is great, but the writing needs tightening up. But, this is extremely rare.

Every submission gets in-depth commentary from three readers/editors (or two readers/editors if you submit in last month of our cycle). The commentary has Specific Commentary (line edits) and General Commentary that reflects on how the piece works.
If selected for publication, we have an in-house editing process where author has approval of final edits.

We edit for typos but generally publish the work as it was submitted. We've learned that sometimes the typos are intentional as well.

We look for work that is polished and thoroughly developed. Still, we do work with writers to line edit and provide copy editing and proofreading, but we want work that is for the most part done in our eyes. If edits are suggested by our editors, we do ask for approval from the writer or we ask the writer to make those edits in their own way.

Our editing is primarily holistic. We will fact check and edit essays for consistency in citation, however, we expect pieces to come fully polished grammatically. This applies to our creative writing works as well. We many times offer up feedback that we believe may elevate the piece to publishing-readiness, but the author is the final decider of our suggested revisions. These revisions address larger issues like confusion in plot-lines or character underdevelopment. We don't tell the author's what words to use; that's a show of a great writer to be able to accomplish the final goal or impression by using their own words!

Most of the pieces we either accept or reject. I would say about 15% we might request that the author revise and resubmit based on our editorial suggestions. About half of them do. We would never publish anything that had not been approved by the author. We tend not to edit poetry.

We don't usually provide an extensive amount of editing once we accept the piece. We will make small minor line / grammatical edits if we catch some, but our goal is not to change someone's piece through our own edits.

The winner and the other finalists are invited to the awards ceremony at the annual International Conference on the Fantastic (though only the winner's expenses are paid). At that conference, award-winning editor Sheila Williams of Asimov's Science Fiction magazine does a one-on-one editor with each attendee. For the winner, that edited version is what appears in the magazine.

Most of our accepted come to us ready to publish. We are happy to work to authors on minor edits.

I will work with an author if I think a story is 'almost there,' helping to bring it over the finish line. The writer has final say on changes. Streetlight has a a copy editor.

We make editorial suggestions aimed at clarifying, and we correct spelling and grammar. We check with the author to make sure we understand their intention and are able to preserve their artistic integrity. We have found that asking for revisions is very problematic as an author can earnestly revise, and still produce something we're not able to run.

Depending on the nearness of the publication deadline, we tend to perform substantive, line, and copy editing before publication, which can involve numerous drafts sent back and forth between editor and author. Ultimately, authors get a final say in approving edits, but we hope that authors take the suggestions seriously and with the knowledge that editors care passionately about their story as well.

It depends on the piece, what we're looking to do with it, and what the writer is comfortable with. This is why I read to the end. Sometimes there's a great piece that's just a little obscured by elements that aren't working, and I love to help a writer bring those out.
Other times, especially in poetry, there are formatting and/or technical concerns. But we always give the writer the final word, and edit with them in mind.

Just as much as is necessary.

I provide whatever edits I feel to be needed, and then I go back to the author for their input.

The author always gets to okay the final edits. Absolutely. I do not want to have to do a lot of editing. When an author submits a story it should already have been edited several times by the author. I get too many submissions with typos that could easily be fixed if an author took the time to look over their submission a couple times before submitting it. When I edit a story, I go through paragraph by paragraph and I look at the science, the mechanics. For example, a character has enough charge in their engine to make it 100 meters, but the distance between these two features on the moon is actually 400 meters. I look at word structure "this sentence sounds awkward" or "You repeat the same word three times in the same paragraph." among other things, like two character names are too similar sounding.

Because we have such a small staff, we really need a piece to be nearly perfect when we accept it. Often we suggest line edits (or as I mentioned before, cuts), but unless we've solicited a piece we simply don't have the resources or time to do a substantial workup of a single text. The author gets final approval of all such edits--we don't publish work that the author does not approve. Of course, we do have a professional copyeditor who does the final proof before publication, but that's primarily focused on conforming a text to our house style, and correcting typos.

More than half of the time, we accept pieces that are already polished for publication. On occasion, when a piece shows extreme promise but needs edits, we work with the author of they are willing.

Some, but if extensive work is required, and if we're interested enough in the submitted work, we'll send it back to the author to fix.

We try not to edit someone's work, unless there is an obvious typo. Sometimes writers ask us how we feel about an aspect of their work and we try to give helpful feedback and let them make the final decision.

Rarely do we edit - and when we do, we try to keep it as minimal as possible. All pieces submitted should be publication ready.

we generally provide substantive editing on every level and yes the author gets to approve the final edits.

We work with the authors of accepted manuscripts to finalize and tighten their books into the best versions they can be--we expect manuscripts to be complete and proofread and whole upon submission, but we make (minor) editing suggestions on nearly all the books we accept. It is a collaborative, open process between author and genre editor, and we have not requested substantive changes to an accepted book.

We absolutely provide careful proofreading before publication; honoring the writer's intent is important to us. We also occasionally offer edits, suggestions, or requests for changes -- but not without a thoughtful discussion among the editors at the table read. We are always willing to work with our contributors to make sure that what we publish is true to their artistic vision and beautifully presented.

We try to edit with an "invisible hand" as much as possible to preserve the voice and original intent of the author. We also prefer to accept pieces that do not require heavy editing, as most writers are sensitive about their work and its alteration. The author is sent a proof for final approval, we take those notes to heart and typically implement the requests. On a side note: The Opiate does not believe in the Oxford comma.

We rarely get into content edits, but all accepted work goes through an in-depth copy-editing and proofreading process, with PDF galleys sent to authors for approval before publication.

To accept a story, it has to already be in good shape and require no more than basic line editing/proofreading. Authors submit on the understanding that only technical alterations will be made to their work; anything more substantial will need a quick exchange with the author or result in rejection.

It depends on the article and the story. Sometimes heavy editing is required and other times it is not important since editing can rob the soul of the article.

As mentioned earlier, we don't do a lot of developmental editing. For better or worse, it's a luxury we just can't afford. We definitely do copy editing and proofreading, not just for errors but to keep certain usage issues consistent across the whole magazine.

We do not do any editing of pieces. Once in a while we ask for a title or word change, but rarely. Pieces that require editing are usually rejected, unfortunately, because there is just too much great material submitted. A promising piece that needs editing will get a note of encouragement, but we'd require a resubmission of a revised piece to accept.

We try to edit with a light hand, but occasionally request revisions. We do copy edit the manuscript with care, and have revised our calendar this year in order to leave time to reach out to contributors for approval.

We provide editing services for a fee as several specific, separate options for writers (see our submission guidelines). For our open submissions, we provide virtually none. Writers who require substantial editing are declined for publication and/or are referred to third-party providers.

This is also something we thought we'd have more time for. Very seldom have we accepted a piece with the intention of working with a writer to edit it. More often the work we accept is in a ready-to-publish state. In our first three issues, we've probably worked with writers to edit their pieces three or four times. We also provide feedback to rejected work (if the paid submission option was selected) so that provides a lot of time spent on offering general feedback on structure, pacing, language, etc.

Once for the CafeLit web site. This is a simultaneous copy-edit / proof read. Twice if it's for one of our anthologies - a copy -edit followed by a proof read. Three times for novels and single author collections: structural edit, copy / line-edit, proof-read. In fact, we proof read each full book three times. This is done by the author, the original editor and one other editor in-house.

We generally do no editing, or very very little.

A lot. A LOT a lot. Our general process is to go through a structural editor, then back to the author to amend, then back to the editor to accept or suggest more. If the editor approves, it goes to a copy editor, and afterwards back to the author to amend. This can go back and forth between author and editor at this point as this is a much closer edit than before and differences of opinion can spark debate. Some authors like more intervention that others. After this, it gets proofread and then sent to a typesetter. After the typesetter, it gets proofread once more, sent back to the author for approval and checking, and finally sent back to the in-house team for a full check before being sent to the printers.

We do not edit submissions.

We will not publish poop. That being said, we provide basic copy editing, which typically does not require author approval. So essentially, make sure your submission is edited to your liking before sending it in, and if accepted, we'll do a basic cleanup if necessary.

We expect material to be finalised before submission. We do offer suggestions for improvement
as well as critical appraisals and mentoring. We send out proofs for approval to accepted authors.

Very little. It's usually just correcting a typo or a spelling error. Rarely, if something more needs to be done, we contact the author and work together to solve the problem.

Most pieces I accept unedited, some involve many tweaks. I wish we had the resources to offer more hands-on editing which could lift a good, publishable short story to a higher, exceptionally achieved level.

It's actually quite rare that Qwerty edits its accepted submissions. There are always slight line edits (an em-dash here, a comma there) and format considerations, but all things considered, we accept work that is publication-ready.

Usually prizes go to books that require minimal or no editing, in terms of style and content, simply because we pick books that we really really like! The books we decide to publish of course go through a process of proofreading and editing prior to publication but we work closely with authors, who always get the last say regarding edits.

Editing encompasses both micro and macro levels. For a submission to be considered for publication, it should more or less be of a certain standard in terms of its literary and artistic merits. I read a work for its clarity and style (imagery, theme, stylistics) while paying attention to line breaks and rhythm (for poetry), before zooming in on the nitty gritty like grammar, spelling and punctuation. I usually highlight certain lines or phrases that need to be honed, and suggest that writers consider editing them themselves first. At times, I offer further suggestions after revisions come back to me, if they still don't quite work. The process is collaborative, and what's important is striking a balance between editorial input and the writer's voice.

Substantive editing is time-consuming, so it is better to produce camera-ready work. We are willing to do it for rough pieces of remarkable potential, after checking to see if the author is open to it.

We do substantive editing. I let my authors make the final call on edits. They're the artist and they should have final say about their work. It's my job to give the author a push in the direction that I think will be positive for the book. If they choose to disagree with me, it's their book not mine.

There is rarely much editing -- if I see something that seems like an error, when I reply with the acceptance, I ask if it is all right to edit. After that, the story is in its final form.

I really don't edit an accepted piece prior to publication. We have a style guide, but when we accept a story, I generally give the author a chance to make any changes (small) with the caveat that if they make huge changes, we might not want to publish the piece. This is also why it's CRUCIAL that you send publication-ready stories -- we assume that what you send us is what you think should be in the magazine, so why would we mess too much with that?

We make small corrections to the text if we are sure that this will not change the way that the author intended the work to be presented. We do not send those changes back to the author. Occasionally when a work is too good to miss but needs more extensive changes we will return this to the author with our suggestions. Then it is up to them whether or not they want to re-submit.

All full-length manuscripts go through an editorial process looking at both micro (line edits, grammar, formatting) and macro (ordering, inclusion of specific poems, etc) elements of the collection.

I am a light touch as an editor, but I will do more- if the writer agrees in advance. Once or twice, a writer has had such a good idea, and has presented it so well, that I will invest the time to suggest substantive revisions.
For example, we had one piece in which the narrator shifted in the middle, without warning. It was an artistic choice that just did not work in a short piece. I suggested two or three ways to help the reader follow the writer’s intent, and the writer came up with a totally different, but even better method.
We send out galleys prior to publication, and writers may withdraw their piece if they want. That hasn't happened yet, but it might at some point. That is the nature of the task. The only really negative comment I have received on a galley was that the writer did not like the artwork. Not a problem. We moved it.

I do some minimalist proofreading while I format an issue. By that point, it's too late for the writer to review any edits I make. So, all writers should proofread and edit their work prior to submitting it, with the assumption that it is likely to be printed nearly as-is. Occasionally, I ask my editing interns to help me edit PLJ, and they might make heavier edits, and these also would not have sufficient time to return to the writer for a double-check. PLJ and CCR are released on a tight tri-annual schedule, so that when content is ready, it's time to release it: there is no time for an added check from the 20-50 writers involved in each issue (who have different schedules, and might need a month or more to double-check the work).

Almost all stories receive substantive edits. Some pieces require very little, but many go three or more rounds of extensive developmental, line, and copyedits. We certainly agree on a final draft with the author.

This is probably subjective based on different editorial cultures. At the Drabblecast, we probably publish 90% of our stories as submitted. Most often if there are substantive edits and proofing process engaged it has to do with adapting the story to be more compatible in spoken audio. Stories that require a significant amount of revision due to copy edits and technical problems will not wind up working their way to consideration.

Our editing depends on the piece. We do not offer substantive editing; we would rather the author rework their piece and resubmit at a later date. We do provide line editing and copy editing. Authors get to approve all final edits prior to publishing.

Our books are...everything. The quality of our books is what tells readers we are serious about the industry and its betterment. Every manuscript we take on undergoes substantive, stylistic, and copyediting, one round of each at the minimum. Once the books are fully edited and typeset, we agonize over the proofing. We check physical and digital proofs to make sure everything is perfect before we release a book into the wild. Always. We believe the quality of our product, inside and out, is what will carry our name.

We only edit for spelling and grammar and even then we are careful not to change the tone or meaning the author intended. If we feel like a piece is a good fit but needs heavier editing, we may go line by line and let the author participate in the process.

It depends on the piece. Some stories require little, if any, editing. For some pieces, we may go back and forth with the author a few times. If the story shows promise but doesn't quite fit a theme or genre, we might send comments to the author with a request to revise and resubmit.

We expect a piece to arrive to us edited to the best of the author's ability. We will change all words to Canadian spelling, add Oxford commas, and do light copy editing when required. On rare occasions, when we really believe in a piece, we request edits by the author before we accept it for publication. Every contributor receives a PDF proof of their work within our layout before we go to print and is invited to offer up reasonable requests for changes. Final approval still rests with myself.

The amount of editing we're able to do with each piece varies, but the speed of our editorial cycle generally determines the plausibility of deep edits. If we accept a piece with substantial flaws, we'll generally only accept it if we happen to discover it very early in the process; otherwise, we may have to pass on a piece that we love. We copyedit each piece (we do have a Style Guide to which we try to adhere), do some line-editing and proofreading, and we do give writers the chance to make tweaks/approve edits before launch. Situations in which we'd question a poet's spatial choices or ask a prose writer to change a major plot point are exceedingly rare.

We often do line editing. If a piece needs substantial revision, we don't accept it. But if there are some awkward lines, we will address those before publication. Author always gets to approve final edits.

With the Review, not much. With books, which we ONLY solicit, we work with deeply the author.

We typically won't take a piece if it requires substantiative edits.

It really depends on the submission.

It all depends how much we like the piece. If it needs to be rewritten, because the author is too young or too careless, we will recommend the writer find another publication. If the piece is good and the writer is talented, we will work with him/her until we finish what needs to be done. If the writer requests help, we provide it.

If there appears to be a typo or line breaks are necessary to fit a piece on the page, we will make those decisions -- carefully. Many times we will contact the author and discuss issue we have together. Our editing of other's work is minimal.

We hardly edit at all. We may ask for some line edits, but we are seeking polished pieces that have been worked over and where the effort has been made to submit a high quality piece. The author can approve, but we retain the final say if we feel the edits are essential for publication.

This depends on what was agreed in advance when the call for submissions came out. In The Circle I read each submission three or four times at different stages of the process, and gave comments to each submitter - at both high levels (what I liked and what I thought needed attention), and some line editing. If there was a repeated error or inconsistency, I raise it once and say to watch out for it afterwards. And yes, the author gets to approve the final edits. We also send them the page-proofs to check.

Each piece goes through basic proofreading. Pieces that staff decide would benefit from more substantial edits are treated by our copyeditors and sent back to the author for approval. However, most pieces do not undergo a lot of major edits.

Taking something out is easy to ask a writer to do. Story is so much stronger without these two lines here, what do you think about removing them? Or what about having this story start with the second paragraph, stuff like that, I have zero hesitation to ask a writer what they think about those edits of that nature.
Basic proofreading for spelling, grammar, etc. is a given and to be honest if there was very much of it to be done most likely the story got rejected and never reacted the editing stage.
Suggesting synonyms for an over-used word is easy to do too, especially remembering NUNUM works with pieces of 500 words or less. So repeated words are supernova obvious and if they aren't busy reconstituting something a synonym will be suggested for sure.
Line editing, suggesting additions, mmm, this is where it gets very grey for me and again remembering the length of the work NUNUM works with, there wouldn't be more than one, max two, of these I would be comfortable with asking a writer to consider. After all, a writer is sending me their story, the way they wanted to write it, they are only asking me if I want to publish it and not do I want to rewrite it the way I think it should have been written and then publish it.
Does the author get to approve the final edits? Is that a joke? If there is an editor out there that edits work and publishes it before getting the green light from the author they should be fired on the spot. A submission is an offer, not a gift you can bring to the store and exchange for store credit to use to buy what you really wanted.

We edit with care and sensitivity. All writers should expect to be edited well and should also expect to participate in the process. Authors review all edits made to their work in TMR.

We prefer a book that does not need editing. If a book is outstanding but needs some tiny edits, I will talk to the author about it. Blue Light Press will never make edits without the author's approval. The author is responsible for proofreading, and we do not allow additions to the ms. after the book is accepted for publication. We also rely on our authors to promote their books, do readings, and do everything they can to publicize their books.

This varies widely. If a piece excites us in style or content, we'll go to some lengths to get it ready for publication. This can include significant structural revisions with author buy-in. Every piece is line edited and proofread, and every author gets to sign off on the final version.

It depends on the story. Sometimes we accept a story with no changes. I’d say about half or more of the stories we accept go through some revision, and that some of that is substantial. We have a copy-editor on staff, and the writer gets approval of the galleys before we go to print.

Prose pieces usually get some small tweaks. Poetry less so. We are generally not interested in editing pieces heavily, and we prefer to consider finished, polished submissions.

Not much. We hardly touch poetry--only obvious errors. Essays, however, might get a few suggestions. We won't accept a piece if we think it has obvious flaws.

We don't tend to edit poetry very much. More poets work with editors or do peer swaps before sending in work, I think. Prose tends to at least receive copy editing. If we think a piece could be made stronger, we'll let you know. We only ever want to publish the best version of your work.

I don't edit or change their work except where obvious misspellings occur. I format it the way they send it, that part takes a lot of work, as it is all done manually. But changes to their work is never made beyond obvious oversights.

This really depends on the submission. There is no formula, as every work is created differently.

We're far more intensive than the average journal when it comes to polishing our contributors' fiction. Nothing is accepted "as is." We work through substantive edits--usually three to four rounds of line editing--but (outside of incorrect grammar/typos not utilized for a purpose) we never demand any changes. It's a collaborative process, as it should be, but the writer has the final say, and every writer I've worked with has said their story was better at the end of the process. Not only was their story better, but they had the experience of working closely with someone who really gave a damn about their work-- someone who really saw the value and gave it a close eye. The poetry side is similar, though less intensive; many contributing poets work with the managing poetry editor to polish their poem before publication.
All of that isn't to say that we work on rough, rookie, or unpolished material. Don't send us half-considered fiction or poetry. Most of the work we select is highly polished and thoughtful from the moment we set our eyes on it; but there is always room for improvement. Whether you're unpublished or a veteran, there's always room for improvement. If there isn't, why keep writing?

We don't believe in editing accepted work, except to clear up minor typos. Out of fairness to the other entrants, we have to take the piece as we find it, not as we wish it could be. The author has final say on suggested fixes.

Any major editing is presented to the author for final review. However, since we focus on brevity and short prose most work should be print ready.

We do basic copy editing and proofreading. If the piece needs more work than this, we don't accept it. The work should be polished and ready for publication when it's submitted. We've noticed a marked change in the technical quality of submissions in the last few years and find ourselves accepting fewer pieces on first cut because of it. If your talent doesn't extend to basic punctuation, spelling, and grammar, please develop these skills before submitting. A simple pass through a word processing program can solve a fair number of the technical issues we encounter in submissions.

We provide substantive editing for all of the stories we accept for publication. However, for us, this is not a top-down process but rather an extended conversation with the author as we work to make the piece the best it can be.

We find most submitted work we accept does not need substantial editing. If we feel a piece needs significant work, we either ask for revisions from the writer or suggest the writer submit new work in the future. As editors, we copy edit (word and line editing) and proofread; we will inform a writer (before publication) of a substantive edit we’ve made. In most cases, we feel editing is at our discretion.

Pieces are edited mainly for brevity. Some stories only need a few fixes per page. Some need every sentence tinkered with. Major content edits are typically sent out as revise/resubmits. The author gets final approval, but must explain with sound reasoning why they would refuse any of our changes.

If we have substantial editorial suggestions for a piece we would like to publish, we may propose them to the author as a condition of acceptance. (Or we may make editorial suggestions to pieces that we aren't ready to publish, and invite the author to resubmit a revision.) For lighter edits, we also usually mention them upon acceptance as well. We don't do extensive line edits but we do provide proofs for each author to review and approve before the issue goes to publication.

This is on a case by case basis. There's always some editing, even for the poems. In some cases, we're willing to substantively edit a piece—but the author has to be okay with this, too. In all cases we proofread an accepted piece carefully, and will offer line-edits if we feel it's necessary. We send the author proofs once the piece has been styled, and the author gets a final say about that.
In the end, we will defer to an author. We enjoy having a back and forth with an author about a piece of writings. It's okay if an author doesn't accept all of our suggested edits. We are always trying to make a piece of writing the absolute best it can be in the author's own voice and style. If a story comes to us light on the commas, we won't try to insert commas everywhere it might be technically correct to do so, because that's not the author's style. Most authors are wonderful to work with, and appreciative of the effort we put into their work.

We accept pieces that are pretty much publication ready. Pieces go through copyediting before publication, of course, but we don't accept a piece if it needs significant revision.

We conduct a full range of editing, from proofreading to major revisions--if the work needs it and we love it. Any substantive editing is approved by the author.

We provide as much editing as we feel is needed, which can be a large amount. We do very little to no substantive editing of storylines, but we do a lot of careful proofreading and copy editing. We are more accommodating to creative license (regarding, e.g., punctuation) for poetry than for prose. Authors get to approve final edits.

It really depends on the submission. There are some pieces that contain original and interesting content that we would like to publish but may require more substantial editing to make it readable. Other pieces require edits that are only grammatical or stylistic. The author does get to approve the final edits before publication.

It depends. We try to accept a piece that is as close to flawless as possible. Sometimes we accept and find that we have to query the author about several issues. Several eyes go through the proofs before it goes to print.

We may make light suggestions for clarity, and we may occasionally suggest a revision to the beginning or end of a piece. However, most pieces are published without editorial changes, aside from mild grammatical edits. We do not accept writing that needs a great deal of editing.

In rare cases, one of our editors will work with a writer on a substantial rewrite. In most cases, editorial feedback is minor. We proof every manuscript ahead of publication, but this process only includes copy editing.

Very little, generally. We accept finished, polished writing.

We hope to receive work that is ready to publish, or as near as possible. Once in a while, though, we get a piece that we see has tremendous potential, something that pulls us in. We don't often ask for a writer to do full revisions on a piece of work, but it can happen. In terms of poetry, our editor is particularly keen to see that the lineation is efficacious, that each line does work as a line. For the most part, however, please expect that we will do copy edits on the work and proofreading. The content should already be there and ready to publish. You will be sent the edits to approve before it goes to layout. You will also be given a proof of the layout to look over for any errors before it goes to press.

The less we have to do, the better. There seems to be a huge correlation between how good the story is and how good the state of the manuscript is in in terms of no typos, grammar mistakes, etc. That said, we will comb over the entire text multiple times to really make sure it's pristine. On a similar note, the less developmental editing needed, the better. That said, we do work closely with our authors to say, "Hey, this is really great, but how about addressing/adding/changing XYZ to make it even better?" When we make such suggestions, we give good reason for the change and we'll work closely with the author to ensure that its handled how the author wants--and maybe said author can build on our suggestions to come up with an even grander idea.
If the text needs, say, the last third rewritten in our opinion, we'd likely just send a "revise and resend." However, if the majority of the text was fantastic, but say, a big plot twist could've been handled better (or just fell flat), and maybe a few other points here and there needed smoothing out, we'd work closely with the author to really get it it all to work.

Step one is to send the author a list of questions I have and revisions I think need to be made. After that I line edit, copy edit, and proofread the revised manuscript and return my version to the author for approval, a final proofread, and any further tweaks he or she wants to make. Disagreements are infrequent. When an author feels strongly about a point I'll usually give in—but most of the time they accept my advice.

It depends on what the piece requires, but we typically provide one to two rounds of both content edits and line edits. The author always approves the final edits before the story goes on to publication.

Of the ten pieces I publish each month I'd say only two, maybe three, actually require very much editing. I ask that writers send highly polished and professional submissions (again in the guidelines) so this cuts down on the line editing stuff, etc. When I do offer editing insight it's most of the time either with the beginning or end of the story. I've never had a writer balk at any of my suggestions, and they do get final approval. I've been very lucky in that way.

It depends. We always provide basic proofreading and copyediting, we often suggest minor line edits, and in some cases we work with contributors to provide more substantive editing. The author always gets to approve any edits: we send out proofs to all contributors before we go to press.

Though each of our final selections are closely and professionally copy edited, we keep other editing to a minimum. We have enough excellent submissions that we will decline submissions that require extensive editing.

This depends according to genre.

This varies widely, depending on the piece and the editor. Most work is accepted as-is, with standard proofreading being the our only intervention in a manuscript. However sometimes we get a story that is teetering right on the edge of greatness, and in that case one of our editors might choose to work with the author to tighten things up a bit. Of course, the author gets the final say in whatever is eventually published.

We love diligent writers who need little to no editing. We try to keep with basic copy editing that prevents either the writer or the magazine any embarrassment. Sometimes, and I mean seldom, will we work with a writer to make a piece ready for publication.

we've already touched on this, but as with most things it varies. we love editing if the work could benefit from it, but are just as happy to have a perfectly packaged piece fall into our laps. writers always get final approval. it is their work - their hearts, minds, souls, imaginations on the page - and we never want to take away from that.

Once the piece is accepted, I do a close reading for anything I might have missed. Generally, if the changes are minor, I make them without comment. Occasionally, I may ask someone to rewrite or ask if we can make a change. I respect the writer's vision, though, so I prefer not to tamper with it. Format, however, must conform to both the print and the online edition guidelines regarding tabs and justification.

As I mentioned earlier, for each issue, we have enough bandwidth to work with a few folks whose pieces need significant editing. We try to avoid line editing, though sometimes there are small changes that seem obvious to one of the editors. In those cases, the editors propose the changes to the authors, who (so far!) tend to be appreciative of the attention their work has gotten. We do proofread, but we'd rather focus our proofreading time on making sure the journal copy matches the submitted piece, not on proofing the submissions. When submissions are riddled with errors due to poor proofreading, they rarely get to the short-list.

This varies as well. We don't accept work that isn't already well written, but we do sometimes do some line editing, and we almost always copyedit. If we only do copyediting and fact checking (place names, brand names, and the like), we do not get author approval. If we make more significant line edits, we do.

Our focus is on the work; the author's name recognition is irrelevant except insofar as ego or past habituation to auto-piloting may hinder the editing process. That said, we want to sculpt and burnish each story to its maximum potential, not change it to fit preconceived Procrustean beds. We also do acknowledge the engineer's motto, "The perfect is the enemy of the (very, very) good." For the rest: yes to all of the above.

Usually basic proofreading, line editing as needed, and rarely more involved copy editing. Our founder, Gordon Linzner, is kind enough to handle this for S&T.

Type? Goudy Old Style (hee!)
We fix punctuation. If we edit content, we confirm with author.

Sometimes a piece doesn’t need more than copyediting. Other times, we provide substantive editorial notes in addition to line editing, copyediting, fact-checking, proofreading. Always, the author is very involved. They will see proofs, sometimes multiple sets. No changes are made without their approval.

We try to select a winning piece that is ready for publication as much as possible. That said, we do copy edit and proofread a manuscript, sometimes suggesting a line change or two, then send these to the author for discussion. Ultimately, we want the manuscript to reflect the author's vision.

Once a piece is accepted, we rigorously proofread and copy-edit it. We sometimes offer line edits and editorial suggestions, but always as part of a conversation with the author. We make no substantive changes to the content, language, or presentation of a piece without a writer's prior approval.

The ideal book is one we have to edit the least. We edit only as much as to check for typos and certain sentence structure and punctuation, plot discrepancies, whatever we need to do to give the book its best presentation to the masses. We are very sensitive to the author and don't hack up their stuff. When submitting to us the book has to be in its best possible shape to begin with where extensive editing shouldn't be necessary.

Very little. However, when genre editors make editorial decisions we expect that authors comply.

This varies widely based on the quality of the submission, the intentions of the section editor, and the special characteristics of the piece. Something that really needs work but is very interesting is likely to get the attention it needs, whereas anything that is worth publishing but has serious writing problems is likely to be rejected with an invitation to revise and re-submit. Ultimately, the call is made by the individual section editors in question, because they maintain the closest relationship with contributors with respect to close reading & editing of their work.

Heavily.