Abstract
The article examines the elements of internal scientific expertise within the editorial board of the pre-revolutionary “Mining Journal” based on a collection of archival documents, including correspondence with authors and reviews of submitted articles. All sources are introduced into scientific discourse for the first time. The article highlights specific cases that illustrate the reasons why the journal’s editorial board rejected authors’ submissions for publication. Both negative reviews of submitted articles and positive feedback from reviewers are considered. The reviewers were leading specialists of their time in the fields of mining, geology, and mineralogy, enjoying recognition from the mining community. In conclusion, a brief classification/grading system for the rejection of scientific articles submitted for consideration to the editorial board of the “Mining Journal” is proposed.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
