Editing guide

Church History Review proofreading guide and form

Dear Editor!

An invitation to review a scientific paper is recognition of the academic work of the reviewer. The professional reputation of a journal is in large part due to its referees. The Journal of Church History Review accepts only papers based on original research and presenting new and innovative results. In the preparation of papers, it is not sufficient to process and present the literature - it can only serve as a theoretical background. The literature used in the paper should be relevant and include recent literature. The research method chosen should be appropriate to the objective pursued. The structure of the study should be clear, logical and coherent. When preparing your referee's opinion, please pay particular attention to the following points

Plagiarism. In the case of a paper containing parts or the whole or part of a work taken without reference from other works, it is considered plagiarism. Suspected plagiarism should be reported immediately to the editor in charge and to the editor.

Confidentiality. All manuscripts sent for proofreading must be treated as confidential documents. Manuscripts may not be disclosed to third parties without the permission of the responsible editor. The conclusions and results of the study may be used before proofreading only if the author gives his/her written consent. Data and research results obtained during the proofreading process are confidential and cannot be used for the proofreader's own research. In the event that the proofreader requests the involvement of a third party in the proofreading process, he/she must inform the responsible editor in advance.

The proofreader is always anonymous during the process. The author should not be informed of the identity of the reviewer, and therefore the use of names, titles, easily identifiable positions, references to previous scientific work, etc. should be avoided in the preparation of the review. Under no circumstances should the reviewer contact the author directly.

Originality. The reviewer should consider whether the paper contains sufficiently new/novel results and is suitable for publication. What is its scientific value? Does it meet the requirements of the journal? Is the research question relevant and sufficiently scientific?

Structure.

Layout and format. Authors should follow the guidelines for authors, which are mainly related to the preparation of the manuscript. If the paper does not meet these requirements, the referee's opinion may make a strong reference to this. Is the topic sufficiently relevant and new, relevant to the profile of the journal? Is the chosen methodology appropriate to answer the research question?

Language, stylistics. In case the paper contains many spelling and grammatical errors, correction is not mandatory. However, the attention of the responsible editor should be drawn to this. Previous research. A crucial question is to decide whether a study based on previous research adequately presents the background. Are there any important works that have been omitted? Are the references adequate? In the light of this, we ask our proofreaders to provide their proofreading opinion by underlining the relevant part, where appropriate, and then indicating the suggested changes!