1. Author gives 2 copies and electronic version of original article according to “Rules for Authors”:
- per post to 220040, Minsk, Nekrasov street, 39-2
- personally on CD-disk or USB Flash to the office 323 located on Nekrasov street, 39-2
Also original article must be submitted electronically on CD-disk or flash drive.
2. Printed version of article should be identical to electronic one, all pages numbered.
3. Manuscript submitted to Editorial Board may be accompanied by the letter signed by head or his deputy of submitting organization.
4. Authors are responsible for accuracy of presented facts, the absence of the facts closed to open publication and accuracy of cited literature.
5. Editorial Board informs authors that article is receipted by e-mail within 5 days. Terms of review will be measured especially by Editorial Board according to better circumstances for optimal publication.
6. Manuscripts should be submitted no later than 1 month prior to the release. Manuscripts submitted later will be recognized as manuscripts for the next issue. Terms of release:
- March 30th – No 1;
- June 30th – No 2;
- September 30th – No 3;
- December 24th – No 4.
Giving review for the article submitted to Journal "Мелиорация" you confirm that this article can be published or not.
Sequence of reviewing scientific article:
1. Review should assess scientific article objectively and contain all-sided analysis of scientific and methodical advantages and disadvantages. Review is compiled according to standard editorial form and includes:
– relevance of article: brief justification of conditions, formulating and solving challenges (issues);
– scientific novelty of investigation: brief introduction of the new scientific result which author got during experiment, what statement is proved, defined, evaluated, suggested.
– practical value of formulation of challenges (issues) or results for the future development of theoretical and practical base of presented area of knowledge: what is effective for concrete scientific direction and how to use the results to implement novelties on practice;
– the adequacy and modernity of research methods;
– comprehensive investigation;
– findings of goal match research problems;
– the quality of an article: style, terminology, wording
If manuscript doesn’t match one or several criteria reviewer notes these remarks in review and recommend author how improve the article quality (reviewer notes all inaccuracies and mistakes).
2. Review should include:
- evaluation of conformity of contents to article title;
- concrete remarks and advantages;
- the appropriateness of publishing.
3. The final part of the review should include valid conclusion, straight recommendation concerning appropriateness of publishing or improvement.
4. Expert signs the review and points his full name, date, scientific degree, academic rank and occupied position.
Thank you for your cooperation,
Yours faithfully, Editorial Board of Journal "Мелиорация"