Гуманитарные ведомости. Выпуск 4 (36). 2020 г

Гуманитарные ведомости ТГПУ им. Л. Н. Толстого № 4 (36), декабрь 2020 г. 147 2.4.3. The materials are accepted only by email of the editorial office (gumved@tsput.ru) or through a scientific publication submission system of «Portal of TSPU scientific journals» http://tsput.ru/journals/ in the following form:  a carefully proofread copy of an article registered in accordance with the Requirements, unpublished earlier anywhere and containing an abstract (100–250 words), keywords (8–10) in Russian and in England, as well as references;  an application for publication (Attachment 1). 2.4.4. The article materials must be of an open nature. Presence of a restrictive stamp serves as the grounds for material rejection of publication. 2.4.5. The notification of authors is carried out by receiving of materials by the executive secretary during three working days. 2.4.6. The manuscript of a scientific article that arrived to the editorial office of a journal is reviewed by a layout editor for completeness of a package of presented papers and a compliance of a manuscript of an article with the Requirements and with a specialization of the journal. In case of non-compliance with terms of publication, an article is not accepted for the further consideration. 2.4.7. The article corresponding to a journal specialization and layout requirements is registered by a layout editor in a log book of manuscripts that arrived to the editorial office with specification of the entry date, title, full name of an author (authors), place of work of an author (authors) and it is directed to review by the editorial board. 2.5. Order and procedure of manuscripts review: 2.5.1. All the articles that arrived to the editorial office of the journal are undergoing mandatory reviewing (expert review). 2.5.2. Scientists who have recognized authority and work in the field of knowledge to which the content of a manuscript relates are involved in reviewing. The reviewer must have the academic degree of candidate or doctor of sciences. 2.5.3. The reviewers are obliged to follow ethical requirements of «Committee on Publication Ethics»(COPE). 2.5.4. Bilateral «blind» review of articles is accepted in the journal ( double–blind – the author and the reviewer do not know about each other). Reviewers evaluate an article for the degree of relevance of a topic and scientific originality as well as its structure and the style of presentation. All comments and suggestions are made to an article in the review. If the notes made by a reviewer are removable, the article is sent to the author for revisions. The editorial office of the journal reserves the right to refuse to publish the author's work who wished to leave a reviewer's comments without attention. 2.5.5. The reviewers must consider an article directed to them in the set terms and send the complete review or substantiated refusal to review with reasons given to the editorial office by email or in a proper way. 2.5.6. The terms of reviewing in each case are determined with consideration for the creation of conditions for quick publication of an article, but for not more than 20 days after the moment of receiving of an application for publication by an editorial office of the journal. The term can be increased in case of necessity of additional reviewing and/or temporary absence of a sectional reviewer. 2.5.7. The editorial office of the journal recommends the reviewers to use a standard form of review. 2.5.8. Based on the results of review, the reviewer present one of the following decisions for consideration by the editorial board of the journal:  to recommend the article for publication;  to recommend the article for publication after the refinement/revisions done;  not to recommend the article for publication. 2.5.9. If the reviewer recommends an article for publication after implementing corrections or does not recommend an article for publication, the review must specify the particular reasons of such a decision with a clear formulation of informative and/or technical deficiencies revealed in a manuscript with indication of particular pages if it is necessary. The reviewer's remarks and wishes must be objective and principled, aimed at increase of scientific and methodological level of a manuscript. 2.5.10. The originals of reviews are stored in the editorial office of the journal during 3 years. According to the requests of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation (Ministry of Education and Science), the reviews are given in an obligatory way to the Highest certification Commission and/or Ministry of Education and Science. Reviews are stored in the publishing house and the editorial office for 5 years. 2.5.11. The editorial Board sends the authors of submissions copies of the review or a reasoned refusal, and shall also send copies of reviews to the Ministry of education and science of the Russian Federation for admission to the editors of the relevant request. 2.5.12. To publish articles of students, graduate students and candidates for scientific degree of candidate of Sciences editorial Board has the right in addition to the above reviews to request a review of the supervisor, which does not exclude ordinary review procedure. 2.6. Decision on publication: 2.6.1. After receiving reviews at the regular meeting of the editorial board, the matter on received articles is considered and a final decision on publication of an article or the refusal to publish is taken on basis of reviewers reports. The decision of the editorial board is taken by the simple majority of votes (the members of the editorial board who can not be present in a meeting receive all necessary materials a day before a session of the editorial board from the editorial