The procedure for reviewing scientific articles published in the online journal"Land Reclamation and Hydraulic Engineering"
1 All articles submitted to the editorial board of the online journal “Land Reclamation and Hydraulic Engineering" (hereinafter referred to as the journal) are subject to a review procedure.
2 The reviewer is chosen by the editorial board: the reviewer is chosen by the executive secretary in agreement with the chief editor (deputy editor-in-chief) and the article is sent for review with a cover letter signed by the chief editor (deputy editor-in-chief).
The reviewer must be a qualified expert in the field of knowledge of the reviewed materials and must have publications on the subject of peer-reviewed article in the last three years.
3 The reviewer accepts the article for review, or sends a reasoned refusal to review to the editor within 3working days.
4 The period for reviewing articles is set in agreement with the reviewer, but cannot exceed 1 month.
5 The review of the article is provided to the executive secretary in one hard copy, must be signed by the original signature of the reviewer and have the date of signing the review.
6 Article review should include:
- general description of the article (title, authors, size);
- general description of the article issue (subject, direction);
- adherence of the issue of the article to the subjects of journal;
- the authenticity of the article;
- confirmation of the absence of illegal borrowing;
- characterization and evaluation of the content of the article, including:
a) scientific statements and results stated in the article;
b) the novelty of scientific statements and results;
c) the validity of scientific statements and results;
d) the significance of scientific statements and results (in terms of the development of science and technology, the prospects for practical application).
- comments on the presentation and style of the article material (including the possibility of reducing the length of the article without loss of understanding of the presented scientific statements and results).
The structure of the article review is given in Appendix 1.
7 Reviewer can:
- recommend the article for publication in the form presented;
- recommend the article for publication after modifications, taking into account the observations made;
- to recommend the article for revision in the light of the observations made with further re-reviewing;
- do not recommend the article for publication.
7.1 A review of an article containing a recommendation to publication of the article should reasonably confirm that this article contains new interesting results and deserves publication.
7.2 If the reviewer recommends the article for publication after revision, taking into account the comments made, they should be formulated with specific comments.
7.3 If the reviewer recommends an article for revision, taking into account the observations made with further re-reviewing, general observations must be formulated and specific comments can be formulated.
7.4 If the reviewer does not recommend the article for publication - the review must indicate the reasons for such a decision.
8 A scanned copy of the article review (without indicating the last name and initials of the reviewer and without the signature of the reviewer) is provided to the author in electronic form. At the request of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation, reviews are necessarily submitted to the Higher Attestation Commission at the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation and / or to the Ministry.
9 The last name of the reviewer can be told to the author only with the consent of the reviewer, is not reported to anyone else and is not published in the journal.
10 Original reviews are kept in the editorial office for 5 years.
