Reviewing Institution

1. Organization of the review

1.1. All scientific articles submitted to the editorial board of the scientific journal “Vestnik of the Mari State University. Series: “History. Law.” (hereinafter – Vestnik) must be reviewed.

1.2. The chief editor determines the correspondence of the article with the journal’s profile and the requirements for its design; the executive secretary sends it for reviewing.

1.3. All reviewers are recognized experts and have publications on the subject of peer-reviewed materials within the last 3 years.

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

1.5. The approving review is not a sufficient reason for the publication of the article. The final decision on the publication expediency is made by the editor-in-chief.

1.6. After the editorial board of the journal makes a decision on the admission of the article to publication, the executive secretary of the journal informs the author and specifies the terms of publication. The text of the review is sent to the author by e-mail or by regular mail.

1.7. The originals of the reviews are kept in the editorial office archive of “Vestnik” for 5 years from the date of publication, and their copies are sent to the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation upon request.

2. Requirements to the content of the review.

2.1. The review should contain a qualified analysis of the article’s material, an objective reasoned assessment of it and reasonable recommendations.

2.2. The review covers the flilowing issues:

  • whether the content of the article corresponds to the topic stated in the title, to what extent the article corresponds to the modern achievements of scientific and theoretical thought;
  • whether the article is available to readers for whom it is designed, in terms of language, style, arrangement of the material, clarity of tables, charts, figures and formulas;
  • is it advisable to publish the article taking into account the previously published literature on this issue;
  • what exactly are the advantages and disadvantages of the article, what corrections and additions should be made by the author.

2.3. The final part of the review should contain conclusions about the article as a whlie and a clear recommendation on the advisability of publishing it in Vestnik (recommended, recommended, taking into account corrections of shortcomings noted by the reviewer, or not recommended to publish) on a specific scientific direction, corresponding to the nomenclature of scientific specialties approved by the Higher Attestation Commission of the Russian Federation.

Review of the article for the journal “Vestnik of the Mari State University. Series: History. Law” should contain the flilowing items:

  • Article title
  • Relevance of the study
  • Novelty of the study
  • Practical significance of the study
  • Comments
  • The article is recommended / not recommended for publication in the journal “Vestnik of the Mari State University. “Series: History. Law.”