REVIEW
of scientific or professional article received by the Editorial Board of Geodetski vestnik
1 IDENTIFICATION DATA
1.1 Title of reviewed article:
1.2 Author's name, institution: (author is registered under code)
1.3 Reviewer's name, institution:
1.4 Date of receipt of the article to review:
2 CLASSIFICATION INTO PROFESSIONAL AREA
2.1 The article is classified into narrow geodetic area
2.2 The article is classified into limit area of geodesy as science and engineering
2.3 The article deals with social events related to geodesy
2.4 The article does not belong to geodetic area in either narrow or wider sense
3 PRESENTATION OF ARTICLE
3.1 Identifying component parts of the article
3.1.1 Article title(s)
– only objective article title:
– article subtitle:
yes
yes
no
no
3.1.2 Abstract
– the article has an abstract in Slovenian:
– the abstract is presented correctly:
yes
yes
no
no
yes
no
yes
no
yes
yes
yes
no
no
no
3.2 Main text of the article
3.2.1 The article contains the following
– mandatory components: purpose of the article, sources, attitude to
similar earlier works, description of methods, techniques, results,
discussions
– optional components: terms and definitions, acknowledgements
3.2.2 Phraseology in agreement with standards
– standard notation:
– measurements are expressed in SI units:
– names, symbols and special nomenclature are presented correctly:
1
– numerical expressions for dates and times are correct:
– citations are correct:
– bibliographic descriptions in sources and/or bibliography are correct:
yes
yes
yes
no
no
no
3.3.1 Articles were originally foreseen for different use
– the article is:
– adapted,
– taken over,
– translated
– original use of the article is adequately marked:
– adaptation or translation version is marked correctly:
yes
yes
no
no
3.3.2 Illustrations and tables
– illustrations and/or tables are numbered correctly:
– illustrations and/or tables are described correctly:
–the author refers to illustrations and/or tables in the text:
yes
yes
yes
no
no
no
3.3.3 Enclosures (annexes)
– the article has enclosures:
– enclosures are correctly placed after references:
– enclosures are marked correctly:
– contents of enclosures are adequate:
yes
yes
yes
yes
no
no
no
no
3.3.4 Fragments of foreign works
– the article contains longer fragment (or fragments) from other
authors:
– the author has adequate permission to use the fragment:
yes
yes
no
no
3.4 Style
– adequate linguistic phraseology:
– adequate terminology:
– requirements of scientific style of expression observed:
– adequate presentation of paragraphs, divisions and chapters:
– adequate use of non-linguistic means (illustrations and tables):
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
no
no
no
no
no
3.3 Other component parts of the article
2
4 ARTICLE CONTENTS
4.1 Original and topical problems discussed
– original problem:
– unoriginal problem, repetition and confirmation of other results:
– expansion of specific problems with several original constituents:
– overview of the state-of-art in specific area:
– professional (non-research) problems:
– treated problems are topical and important:
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
no
no
no
no
no
no
4.2 Authorship (although the author is anonymous and the reviewer only attempts to
evaluate the author's share)
– the delimitation between the author of reviewed text and other
authors is clear:
yes
no
– the contribution of the writer of the article to the treated problem is
disputable/unproved:
yes
no
4.3 Presentation of contents
– the title(s) agree(s) with the article contents:
– the title is informative enough and contains key words:
– the purpose of the article is clearly expressed:
– attitude to previous similar works is described adequately:
– used methods and techniques are reliable:
– used methods and techniques are described with sufficient precision
to allow the research/professional work to be repeated:
– the quantity of stated data is sufficient:
– argumentation is clear and persuasive:
– the description of results conceals errors (typing and similar):
– the results are followed by comments and critiques:
– the conclusion represents summary of earlier theses, their synthesis –
response to the starting hypothesis:
– bibliography shall be completed or extended:
4.4 Correctness or results
– correct
– disputable
– incorrect
5 CLASSIFICATION OF ARTICLE TYPE
- Original scientific article
- Review article
- Short scientific article
- Professional article
- Review, book review, critique
- Polemic, discussion
- Interview
- Popular article
- Other articles or component parts
3
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
no
no
no
no
no
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
no
no
no
no
no
yes
yes
no
no
6 SPECIAL REVIEWER'S OBSERVATIONS AND ARGUMENTATIONS
7 RECOMMENDATION TO EDITORIAL BOARD
– Publication of the article in Geodetski vestnik (with no changes)
– Conditional publication of the article in Geodetski vestnik (when the author corrects it
according to the reviewer's comments)
– The article is not appropriate for publication in Geodetski vestnik
8 QUESTIONS FOR REVIEWER
–
Do you wish to keep the reviewer's name anonymous, i.e. not to be disclosed to the
author(s)?
yes
–
no
If your answer is no, are you willing to explain your review to the author(s) personally,
or do you wish to establish contact with the author(s)?
yes
Place and date:
Reviewer's signature:
4
no