Dear Reviewer!
 

Giving review for the article submitted to Journal "Мелиорация" you confirm that this article can be published or not.

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,