PEER REVIEW PROCESS

 

All received manuscripts by the editors of Urbis et Orbis. Microhistory and Semiotics of the City are reviewed. Review processing is obligatory for all manuscripts submitted to the editors, regardless of the authors’ academic degrees, titles, and official positions.

 

First of all, the manuscripts are reviewed by the editor-in-chief in terms of their compliance with the profile of the journal and “Author Guidelines”, as well as topical importance and scholarly significance. The manuscripts that don't meet the subject of the journal and formal requirements are not accepted for publication. The editors inform the author about this and explain the reasons for the refusal to publish.

 

Then the papers accepted for publication are subjected to the double-blind peer-review process. This means that during the process of reviewing, the personal data of reviewers and authors shall be withheld. The peer-review process is carried out by reputable scholars and experts who have in-depth expertise and work experience in a particular research area.

 

The reviewer’s report should provide one of the following recommendations: a) to accept the material for publication in the journal, b) to accept the material for publication with minor revisions according to the reviewer’s commentaries and suggestions; 3) to reject the material. The content of the review shall be communicated to the author(s) within 10 days after receipt of the reviews by the editors.

 

The manuscripts are reviewed on the basis of the following criteria:

 

- correspondence between the article content and journal topics;

- correspondence between the article title and the article content;

- the level of research competence of the author;

- independence and originality of the research;

- novelty and scholarly significance of the work;

- compliance with the rules of citation;

- completeness of use of sources and literature;

- implementation of a scientific style (except essays and interviews).

•  

Material that does not meet at least one of the listed criteria is rejected and is not accepted for (re) consideration. In this case, the author receives a motivated refusal from the editors. If the material meets all the criteria, but it has minor defects, the material is sent to the author(-s) for revision, indicating the specific comments of the reviewer. The work sent to the author for revision must be corrected and returned within a month. The corrected material undergoes the procedure of re-reviewing. The editors reserve the right to reject manuscripts if authors do not follow the editors' and reviewers' recommendations.

 

Accepted articles are usually published in the order in which they pass the review process, but the editors reserve the right to determine the sequence in which articles are published and to publish some papers out of turn.

 

The approved manuscripts are put into the preparation and production process. The author undertakes to cooperate with the editors of the journal in the process of preparing the material for publication: in due time to read the proofreading and to make corrections to the text.

 

The maximum review period is not more than three months.

 

The reviews are preserved in the editors' office for 5 years.