The rules of the peer review of scientific articles

All articles received by the editorial board, are independently reviewed.

The provisions of reviewing:

    1. The manuscript of a scientific paper, Received journal «Bulletin of the Tver State University. Series: History», is considered the executive secretary for compliance with the profile of the magazine, the requirements for registration is recorded, it is assigned a registration number, what editors inform the authors via e-mail. Manuscripts violation of the rules for the authors will not be considered. Giving the editors of previously published articles is not allowed.

    2. Upon receipt of the article by the executive secretary chief editor sends it for review to two members of the editorial board or, where appropriate, the two reviewers. Information about the author reviewers were not disclosed.

    3. For a review of the manuscript as reviewers may be engaged as members of the editorial board of the newspaper «Herald of the Tver State University. Series: History», the chief editor and qualified scientists and specialists of scientific and educational institutions, with in-depth expertise and experience in a particular scientific field, as a rule, doctors, professors.

    4. Reviewers are not allowed to make copies of articles for their needs. The review shall be conducted confidentially. Breach of confidentiality is only possible in the case of the statements reviewer invalidation or falsification of the materials contained in the article.

    5. The originals are stored in the reviews of the editorial board for five years from the date of publication of the articles and upon request, provide expert advice in the WAC.

    6. If the article is rejected by the reviewer and the Editorial Board, the author provided a copy of the review, the name of the reviewer is not specified.

    7. If the review of the article is a reference to the need to correct it, then the article is sent to the author for revision. After processing, the author of the materials is once again considering the reviewer, then the editorial board makes a decision about the direction of the press. In this case the date of receipt of the editorial board considered the date of return of the modified Article.

    8. Article directed to the author for revision must be returned to the revised form within a month. By the revised manuscript should be attached a letter from the author, containing the answers to all comments and explaining all the changes made in the article.

    9. If an article on the recommendation of the reviewer has undergone substantial processing of the author, it is sent for re-review the same referee who made critical remarks.

    10. The editors reserve the right to reject entries from the inability or unwillingness to take into account the wishes of the author's edition.

    11. In the presence of the negative reviews of the manuscript from two different reviewers, or a review of its revised version of the article is rejected without review by other members of the editorial board.

    12. In case of disagreement with the opinion of the reviewer author has the right to give a reasoned response to the journal. The article can be directed to re-review for approval or the editorial board.

    13. The decision on the appropriateness of publishing the review is accepted after the editor in chief, and if necessary - the editorial board as a whole.

    14. Executive Secretary shall bring to the attention of the author of the decision. The maximum period between the date of receipt of the review of the manuscript to the editor and to make editorial board decision is 2 months.