Reviewing institute

1. Organization of the review.

1.1. All scientific articles submitted to the editorial Board of the scientific journal "Vestnik of Mari state University. Series: history of science. Legal science"" (hereinafter – Vestnik) must be reviewed.

1.2. The chief editor determines the article to the journal profile, requirements for registration, the Executive Secretary sends it for a review.

1.3. All reviewers are recognized experts and have for the last 3 years, publicatio peer-reviewed material.

1.4. Reviewing is double blind, i.e. neither the author nor the reviewer can see the names of each other. The editors send the authors copies of the review or a reasoned refusal.

1.5. The positive review is not sufficient grounds for the publication of the article. The final decision on publication is taken by editor-in-chief.

1.6. After acceptance by the editorial Board the decision on the admission of article for publication Executive Secretary of the Bulletin informs the author about it and specifies publication terms. The text of the review is sent to the author by e-mail or regular mail.

1.7. The originals of reviews are kept in editorial office of the Bulletin within 5 years from the date of publication, and copies are sent to zaprosov the Ministry of education and science of the Russian Federation.

2. Requirements to the content of the review.

2.1. The review should include a qualified analysis of the article material, objective reasoned assessment and reasonable recommendations.

2.2. The review covers the following issues:

– does the content of the article stated in the title, how the article corresponds to modern achievements of scientific and theoretical thought;

– the availability of the article to the readers for which it is designed, from the point of view of language, style and arrangement of the material, clarity of tables, diagrams, figures and formulas;

is it appropriate to publish the article based on previously published on the subject of literature;

– what exactly are the positive aspects and shortcomings of the article, what corrections and additions need to be made by the author.

2.3. In the final part of the review should contain conclusions about the article as a whole and a clear recommendation about the advisability of its publication in the Bulletin (recommended, recommended with the corrections noted by the reviewer or not recommended the article for publication in the journal) for a particular scientific the direction corresponding to the nomenclature of scientific specialties approved by VAK of the Russian Federation.

A review article in the journal "Vestnik of Mari state University. Series: history of science. Legal science""

1. Title of the article

2. The relevance of the study

3. The novelty of the research

4. Practical significance of the research


6. The article is recommended / not recommended for publication in the journal "Vestnik of Mari state University. Series: history of science. Legal science""