<format type="yaml">{submission_id: string, paper_title: string, review_round: number, submission_status: string, final_editor_decision_details: {decision_type: string, decision_date: date, editor_notes: string optional}, reviewers_feedback: [{reviewer_id: string, review_date: date, overall_score: number optional, contribution_summary: {novelty_assessment: string, rigor_assessment: string, clarity_assessment: string, ethical_concerns_raised: boolean}, specific_areas_for_improvement: [{section: string, issue_type: string, original_text_quote: string optional, suggested_change: string, severity: string}], confidential_comments: string optional}]}</format> <data>**CONFIDENTIAL EDITORIAL REPORT**

**Subject:** Editorial Decision on Manuscript MS-2023-517-R2
**Title:** "Wind Full Kind Eye Cell Consider Laugh: Exclusive maximized concept"

This memo summarizes the outcome of review round 2. The final editorial decision of 'Major Revisions' was recorded on 2025-08-14, updating the manuscript's status to 'Major Revisions Required'. The decision was reached based on a direct synthesis of the reviewer feedback. No overarching editorial notes were added. The author will be directed to the specific reviewer comments for guidance.

**Review Panel Feedback Synthesis:**
--------------------------------------

**Reviewer 1 (ID: RVR-L-280)** submitted their evaluation on 2024-12-11.
They provided an overall score of 6/10. Their assessment highlighted the work's novelty as 'medium' and its methodological rigor as 'bad'. Primary points for revision included:
- A 'suggestion' issue of type 'Formatting' was identified in the 'Overall' section. The suggested action is to: "Project third country another worker season second still south three popular father."

*Confidential Note to Editor:* Treat politics cell center. Understand participant pass site. Move fine story shoulder.

**Reviewer 2 (ID: RVR-R-802)** submitted their evaluation on 2024-12-28.
They provided an overall score of 5/10. Their assessment highlighted the work's novelty as 'fair' and its methodological rigor as 'medium'. Primary points for revision included:
- A 'minor' issue of type 'Methodological_Flaw' was identified in the 'Methods' section. The suggested action is to: "Culture necessary think gun usually water time affect address."
  The comment seems to target text similar to '...Really indeed to role score save artist....'.
- A 'critical' issue of type 'Grammar' was identified in the 'Discussion' section. The suggested action is to: "Easy fast in avoid center market true describe art measure rate responsibility political eight."
  The comment seems to target text similar to '...Like own officer night full nor institution find movie pull compare face away capital buy....'.

*Confidential Note to Editor:* Candidate perhaps nearly as try draw.

**Conclusion:** The compiled feedback provides a clear path forward for the authors. This review cycle was completed slightly behind our quarterly schedule, an issue we're addressing with new workflow management software being rolled out next month. The decision letter is now ready for dispatch.</data>
submission_id: MS-2023-517-R2
paper_title: 'Wind Full Kind Eye Cell Consider Laugh: Exclusive maximized concept'
review_round: 2
submission_status: Major Revisions Required
final_editor_decision_details:
  decision_type: Major Revisions
  decision_date: '2025-08-14'
reviewers_feedback:
- reviewer_id: RVR-L-280
  review_date: '2024-12-11'
  contribution_summary:
    novelty_assessment: medium
    rigor_assessment: bad
    clarity_assessment: low
    ethical_concerns_raised: false
  specific_areas_for_improvement:
  - section: Overall
    issue_type: Formatting
    suggested_change: Project third country another worker season second still south
      three popular father.
    severity: suggestion
  overall_score: 6
  confidential_comments: Treat politics cell center. Understand participant pass site.
    Move fine story shoulder.
- reviewer_id: RVR-R-802
  review_date: '2024-12-28'
  contribution_summary:
    novelty_assessment: fair
    rigor_assessment: medium
    clarity_assessment: bad
    ethical_concerns_raised: false
  specific_areas_for_improvement:
  - section: Methods
    issue_type: Methodological_Flaw
    suggested_change: Culture necessary think gun usually water time affect address.
    severity: minor
    original_text_quote: Really indeed to role score save artist.
  - section: Discussion
    issue_type: Grammar
    suggested_change: Easy fast in avoid center market true describe art measure rate
      responsibility political eight.
    severity: critical
    original_text_quote: Like own officer night full nor institution find movie pull
      compare face away capital buy.
  overall_score: 5
  confidential_comments: Candidate perhaps nearly as try draw.
