Peer Review Form
The journal Historia Provinciae – the Journal of Regional History
Peer Review
of the article (indicate article title, length in author’s sheets):
|
Discussion |
||
|
Answer the questions |
Yes |
No |
|
Compliance of the contents of the article with the declared branch of science and speciality |
|
|
|
Relevance of the problem |
|
|
|
Theoretical and practical significance of the research |
|
|
|
Presence of the analysis of the current state of research into the problem |
|
|
|
Scientific novelty |
|
|
|
Personal contribution of the author into the research topic |
|
|
|
Author’s proficiency in using scientific analysis and generalization methods |
|
|
|
Validity of the research results and conclusions, their compliance with the contents of the publication |
|
|
|
Compliance of the title of the article with its contents |
|
|
|
Readability and good academic style of the text |
|
|
|
Recommendations |
||
|
Answer the questions |
Yes |
No |
|
The article is recommended for publication |
|
|
|
The articles is recommended with some stylistic amendments |
|
|
|
The articles is recommended after revision of specific points (the remarks of the reviewer are listed below in the COMMENTS section) |
|
|
|
The articles is not recommended; it requires considerable improvement by the author(s) (the reasons for rejection are listed below in the COMMENTS section; the reasons for rejection are not necessary to be listed if the answer to most of the questions in the DISCUSSION section is negative) |
|
|
|
I give my consent to posting my review in a closed access form in the national bibliographic science citation database RSCI |
|
|
Comments
date signature
