Thanks for the additional info. It sounds like the author, the editors
and the publisher all share the blame. IMHO, ultimately
* an author is responsible for what he wrote and the proofs he checked,
even if the paper is not in his first language.
* the editors are responsible for ensuring the paper fits the
guidelines.
* publisher is responsible for what gets printed.
It is a rule of thumb in some circles that "the system" as implemented
by management is responsible for 80% of problems in any process
[references available upon request ;-) ]. I would say "the system" was
poor and needs improvement by the publisher. Both the author and the
editor apparently assumed the other was taking care of problems and the
result was regrettable. Rather than pointing fingers at either of them,
this looks like a great time for "management" to step in, accept blame,
and fix "the system" so that similar problems don't occur again.
Tim Folkerts
P.S. Whether in active voice or passive voice; whether the translation
was poor by the author or editor: I still wonder why there was any
mention of war in the paper. I'm no expert on immunology, but warfare
seems a little outside the realm of standard topics.
P.P.S See Hake's recent post if you need more context for these
comments.