WHJ does not charge APCs or submission charges

Weapons History Journal (WHJ) is a scientific edition, consequently the papers accepted for analyses and peer reviewing must be prepared in accordance with the requirements applicable to the scientific articles. The paper must contain the brief information on historiography of the problem under discussing, the subject of current research, presentation of results, and conclusion. The investigation per se should meet criteria of originality and topicality, and be of practical importance as well, presuming the possibility of using the results by other specialists and experts.

All the papers submitted are analyzed by the members of the Editorial Board. In case of acceptance, the author is informed, and a reviewer will evaluate the paper. If the review is unfavorable, the paper is sent to another reviewer. Both favorable and unfavorable reviews are sent to writers with recommendations on corrections and changes of the texts. The peer reviewing is double blind that is a reviewer does not know author’s name and vice versa.

The papers must be submitted in electronic version to editor@historical-weapons.com and info@historical-weapons.com

Peer Review Policy

Regulations for the peer reviewing of the papers, submitted to the Weapons History Journal

  1. General positions
    • All the papers, sent to the WHJ editorial board, undergo the peer reviewing.
    • Goal and tasks:
  • The peer reviewing is aimed to provide and ensure the publication of valid and trustworthy information, aiding the development of weapons history knowledge both in Russia and abroad.
  • The task of peer reviewing is the unbiased evaluation of scientific and practical significance of papers submitted.
    • The evaluation peer reviewing is anonymous that is a reviewer does not know writer’s name and vice versa.
  1. Procedure for organizing and conducting of peer reviewing
    • Each paper, submitted to WHJ editorial board, is received by the editor-in-chief, tested against the requirements on preparation, and registered.
    • All the submitted papers are analyzed by the members of the editorial board as well.
    • In case of positive decision by most of the editorial board members, writer is informed about the acceptance of the paper for evaluation peer reviewing.
    • The editor-in-chief chooses the proper reader, sends him or her the paper within a week, and receives the assent or reject to peer review from the reviewer. In the last case, the deputy editor-in-chief chooses another reader.
    • Review (about 0,5 or 1 page text) is prepared within four weeks, beginning the day reader accepted to write it. In certain circumstances in order to publish the submitted and accepted paper quickly the editorial board can ask a reader to hasten.
    • Reader is informed a submitted paper to be an intellectual property of its writer and must be kept under wraps. Readers are not allowed to make copies of the paper submitted for meeting own needs.
    • Review is prepared according to the model (see appendix).
    • In case of a negative evaluation, the paper is sent for extra peer reviewing to another reader, chosen by an editor-in-chief.
    • Reviews with both positive and negative evaluation are delivered to writers in order to inform them about necessary changings and corrections, if any, to be made in the paper, or about the denial of publishing for reasons explained.
  1. Procedure for correcting papers according to reader’s comments
    • If review contains comments on necessary corrections of paper peer reviewed, both texts, the paper and the review (staying anonymous for writer), are delivered to writer via e-mail or post.
    • Paper sent to writer for correcting, must be corrected and sent back within two weeks. The corrected variant must be accompanied by writer’s letter, containing responses for all the critical comments made by reader, and explanations concerning all the changes occurred.
    • In case of reader’s critical comments being not important for the story, the paper is sent to writer to be corrected in accordance with them all the same, though secondary peer reviewing is not carried out. If the comments are important, the paper is delivered for correcting, but secondary peer reading by the same reader takes place.
    • The date, the corrected paper is sent back to the editorial board, is considered as the date the paper is received.
  1. Procedure for deciding on paper acceptance or denial to the publishing
    • The editorial board makes decision on whether paper is accepted or denied to the publishing on the grounds of peer reviewing results.
    • The decision on paper acceptance to the publishing is made on the grounds of its positive evaluation by reader(-s).
    • In case of negative evaluation, the paper is sent to another reader. If the second evaluation is also negative, the paper is denied. If the second evaluation is positive, the editorial board makes decision on accepting the paper to the publishing. The paper could be sent to the third reader, if the editorial board considers it reasonable.
    • After the decision on acceptance/denial of paper to the publishing is made, the editor-in-chief informs writer and announces the target time of publication.
  1. Documents issues
    • In case of lack of critical comments from reader, the text of review is not delivered to writer.
    • The original texts of reviews are kept in the editorial office during three years since article was published.

Appendix

Suggested model for review

  1. Reader’s full name
  2. Title of paper
  3. Evaluation of paper correspondence to the remit of the journal
  4. Topicality of the research
  5. For a newly published article:
  • evaluation of its originality and practical importance;
  • evaluation of its methodological approach.
  1. Tone of voice: for how logically the topic and research are presented, and whether the text is comprehensible for the target audience in terms of language use, narrative style, and the layout of the text, ostensiveness of tables, schemes, drawings and formulae, if any.
  2. Comments on paper weaknesses, if any, corrections and updates to be made by author; recommendations for the text improvement.
  3. Additional comments, things to note and suggest.
  4. Conclusion:
  • paper is recommended to the publishing;
  • paper needs improvement;
  • paper is not recommended to the publishing.
  1. Reader’s signature.

Open Access Policy

Articles published in WHJ are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. Everyone has free and unlimited access to the full-text of all articles published in WHJ. Everyone is free to re-use the published material if proper accreditation/citation of the original publication is given.

The open access policy of WHJ is in accordance with the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI) definition: this means that articles have free availability on the public Internet, permitting any users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose.

Policy of Screening for Plagiarism

Papers submitted to WHJ will be screened for plagiarism using plagiarism detection tools. Editorial Board will immediately reject papers leading to plagiarism or self-plagiarism.
All manuscripts submitted to WHS must have similarity level less than 5%. All authors are suggested to use plagiarism detection software to do the similarity checking. Plagiarism could be detected using follow Plagiarism could be detected using follow resources:

AntiplagiatRU

TextRU

Plagiarisma

PlagTracker

DupliChecker

 

About online plagiarism checkers

Article Requirements

– The final text should be in MS Word *.doc/*.rtf and not more than 100.000 symbols (NOT including interword space) in Times New Roman, type size 12, interval 1,5.

  • Page margins: top and bottom – 25 mm;
    left – 30 mm;
    right – 15 mm.
    • – Illustrations must be submitted in jpg or tif (resolution not less than 300 dpi, preferably 10x15cm with 300 dpi, 1-2 MB)
  • illustrations must NOT be put in the text;
  • illustrations must be numbered;
  • indications of illustrations must be clear and placed in the text properly (Fig. 1);
  • captions must be brought together in accordance with the illustrations order and sent as a separate file MS Word *.doc/*.rtf.

– The paper must contain an abstract of 250-300 words in length and keywords. The summary should describe the topic, methods, results, and conclusions of the paper as comprehensively as possible.

– The keywords should enable an immediate identification of the article with a computer-based search by topic, methods, chronology, and time span.

Structure and elements

Concerning papers in English and other European languages.

Entry 1

In the original language:

  • the article title;
  • the writer/writers name(s);
  • the writer/writers address (the name and address of the institution, e-mail address of all the writers);
  • abstract;
  • keywords.

Entry 2

All the information from Entry 1 translated in English (for the articles written in English initially it is unnesessary):

  • the article title;
  • the writer/writers name(s) (transliteration);
  • the writer/writers data;
  • abstract (the translation by the editorial board is an option);
  • keywords.

Entry 3

The complete text of the article in the original language.

Entry 4

Bibliography in the original language.

Entry 5

Bibliography translated in English and transliterated according to the samples below. The title of the bibliography must be translated in English as “References”.

References, citation and footnotes

References must be put directly in the text as follows (Ivanov 1966, 124) or (Ivanov 2000, 0; Petrov 2004, 134) in case of reference to several publications by different authors.
If the reference is made to the book already quoted, it must be organized as follows (Op.cit, 129). In case the reference is provided for a book as a whole, it must be marked as (Op.cit.).

The mention of authors’ names

Ivanov (2003) points to…
As it has already been mentioned (Ivanov 2003)…
Ivanov in his publications (2001a, 2001b, 2003)…
In 2003 Ivanov revealed the challenging trends (Ivanov 2003)

Figures indication

… in the king’s hands there is an object larger than sabre (Fig. 9)

Quotation

Quotes are placed in the main text and are enclosed in quotation marks “”.
Omitted words at the beginning or end of a quotation are marked with an ellipsis (…). Missing words and phrases inside the quotation are indicated by ellipsis and are enclosed in square brackets […]. Recovered words or parts of words are taken in square brackets – M [essir].

Footnotes

Notes placed at the bottom of a page (footnotes) with continuous numbering 1, 2, 3, …

Lists of publications

The list must be provided in English:

  • publications written in all the languages except English must be transliterated and translated in English;
  • the list must be organized in the line with the Latin alphabet.

The main features of the procedure:

1

    • names of all the authors of publication are mentioned and separated by commas;
    • surnames and initials are NOT separated by a comma.

Sample

Zagurenko A.G., Korotovskikh V.A., Kolesnikov A.A., Timonov A.V., Kardymon D.V.

2

    • the title of a book (monograph) is put in italics;
    • in case of an article, it is the title of a journal or collected papers that is italicized!
    • the title of a source or publication must be transliterated, then without any point or comma its translation in English is provided in square brackets;
    • the title of a journal or collected papers must be also transliterated and after it an English translation put in square brackets is given;
    • in case of proceedings of a conference with its title in English, it is this English title that is provided only!

3

    • if the publishing house belongs to an institution, the name of the institution must be translated in English like:
      Moscow St. Univ. Publ.
    • if the publishing house has its own name, it must be also transliterated and provided with definition Publ. like:
      Nauka Publ.

4

    • for the article from a journal its volume, issue or year of publication, and number must be mentioned like:
      vol. 5, i. 2. or 2013, no. 7.

5

    • in case of monography (book), the overall number of pages must be marked;
    • in case of a separate article only its pages in the corpus mast be given like:
      221 p. or pp. 54-57 correspondingly.

The samples for the references preparation

  • monography:

Shotton, M. A. (1989). Computer addiction? A study of computer dependency. London, England: Taylor & Francis. 464 p.
Karminskiy A.M., Peresetskiy A.A., Petrov A.E. (2005). Reytingi v ekonomike: metodologiya i praktika [Ratings in economics: Methods and practice]. Moscow, Finansy i statistika Publ., 240 p.

  • reference to a translated publication:

if the publication is in English, the authors’ names must be provided in English spelling as well as the original English title of the publication must be marked in its original version but not in the back translation.

Stone G.C. (2008). A Glossary of the Construction, Decoration and Use of Arms and Armor: in All Countries and in All Times. Jack Brussel Pub., 1961. 694 p. (Russ. ed.: Stoun D. K. Oruzhie i dospehi vseh vremjon i narodov. Moscow, Astrel’ Publ. 767 p.).

Timoshenko S.P., Young D.H., Weaver W. (1985). Vibration problems in engineering. 4 th ed. New York, Wiley, 1974. 521 p. (Russ. ed.: Timoshenko S.P., Iang D.Kh., Uiver U. Kolebaniia v inzhenernom dele. Moscow, Mashinostroenie Publ. 472 p.).

Brooking A., Jones P., Cox F. (1984). Expert systems. Principles and case studies. Chapman and Hall. 231 p. (Russ. ed.: Bruking A., Dzhons P., Koks F. Ekspertnye sistemy. Printsipy raboty i primery. Moscow, Radio i sviaz’ Publ., 1987. 224 p.).

  • chapter in the collected  papers edited by:

Haybron, D. M. (2008). Philosophy and the science of subjective well-being. In M. Eid and R. J. Larsen (eds.), The science of subjective well-being, pp. 17-43. New York, NY:
Guilford Press.

  • journal article:

Kulikov, V. A., Sannikov, D. V., & Vavilov, V. P. (1998). Use of the acoustic method of free oscillations for diagnostics of reinforced concrete foundations of contact networks. Defektoskopiya, (7), 40-49.
Kaplin, V. V., Uglov, S. R., Bulaev, O. F., Goncharov, V. J., Voronin, A. A., Piestrup, M. A. (2002). Tunable, monochromatic x rays using the internal beam of a betatron. Applied Physics Letters, 80(18), 3427-3429.
Zagurenko A.G., Korotovskikh V.A., Kolesnikov A.A., Timonov A.V., Kardymon D.V. (2008). Tekhnikoekonomicheskaya optimizatsiya dizaina gidrorazryva plasta [Techno-economic optimization of the design of hydraulic fracturing]. Neftyanoe khozyaistvo [Oil Industry], (11), 54-57.

  • conference proceedings:

Usmanov T.S., Gusmanov A.A., Mullagalin I.Z., Muhametshina R.Ju., Chervyakova
A.N., Sveshnikov A.V. (2007). Osobennosti proektirovaniya razrabotki mestorozhdeniy s primeneniem gidrorazryva plasta [Features of the design of field development with the use of hydraulic fracturing]. Trudy 6 Mezhdunarodnogo Simpoziuma “Novye resursosberegayushchie tekhnologii nedropol’zovaniya i povysheniya neftegazootdachi” [Proc. 6th Int. Technol. Symp. “New energy saving subsoil technologies and the increasing of the oil and gas impact”]. Moscow, pp. 267-272.

  • on-line link reference:

APA Style, Available at: http://www.apastyle.org/apa-style-help.aspx (accessed 5 February 2011).
Rules for the Citing of Sources [Pravila Tsitirovaniya Istochnikov]. Available at: http://www.scribd.com/doc/1034528/ (accessed 7 February 2011)

  • reference to an article in an electronic journal:

Kontorovich A.E., Korzhubaev A.G., Eder L.V. (2006)/ Prognoz global’nogo jenergosnabzhenija: metody, kolichestvennye ocenki i prakticheskie vyvody [Forecast of global energy supply: Techniques, quantitative assessments, and practical conclusions]. Mineral’nye resursy Rossii. Ekonomika i upravlenie [Mineral resources of Russia. Economics and Management], no. 5. Available at: http://www.vipstd.ru/gim/content/view/90/278. (accessed 22.05.2012).

  • reference to an article put on-line:

Kondrat’ev V.B. Global’naya farmatsevticheskaya promyshlennost’ [The global pharmaceutical industry]. Available at: http://perspektivy.info/rus/ekob/globalnaja_farmacevticheskaja_promyshle nnost_2011-07-18.html. (accessed 23.06.2013).

  • references to the figures put legally on-line should be made as footnotes like:

…as a sword the weapon is described on the site of the Metropolitan museum23. 23 https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/449855

  • thesis reference:

Semenov V.I. (2003). Matematicheskoe modelirovanie plazmy v sisteme kompaktnyi tor. Diss. dokt. fiz.-mat. nauk [Mathematical modeling of the plasma in the compact torus. Dr. phys. and math. sci. diss.]. Moscow. 272 p.

Grigor’ev Iu.A. (1996). Razrabotka nauchnykh osnov proektirovaniia arkhitektury raspredelennykh sistem obrabotki dannykh. Diss. dokt . tekhn. nauk [Development of scientific bases of architectural design of distributed data processing systems. Dr. eng. sci. diss.]. Moscow, Bauman MSTU Publ. 243 p.

Atmanova Ju.G. (2013). Portret v mogol’skoi miniatjurnoj zhivopisi XVI-XIX vekov (ikonografija, tipologija, semantika). Diss. kand. iskusstvovedenija [Portrait in Mogul miniature painting of the 16th-19th centuries (iconography, typology, semantics). Thesis for the Candidate’s Degree in Art history]. Moscow.

  • reference to the synopsis of a thesis:

Galerkina O.I. (1951). Material’naja kul’tura Srednej Azii i Horasana HV-HVI vv. po dannym miniatjur leningradskih sobranij. Avtoreferat diss. kand. istoricheskih nauk [Material culture of Central Asia and Khorasan XV-XVI centuries according to the miniatures of the Leningrad meetings. Abstract of thesis for the Candidate’s Degree in historical sciences]. Leningrad.

  • references to anonymous papers:

Russian Pharmaceutical Market. Results of 2010. The Analytical Review. DSM Group, 2011. 74 p. (In Russ.).
Acts collected by the Caucasian Archeographic Commission (1884). Tiflis. Vol. IX. (In Russ.).

Preparation of references in other languages

    • in this case the original title of a publication is also provided along with its English translation put in square brackets afterwards:
      Heim, C., Schoettker, P., Spahn, D.R. (2004). Glasgow coma score für den patienten mit schädel-hirn-trauma [Glasgow Coma Scale in traumatic brain injury]. Anaesthesist [Anesthetist], 53 (12). pp. 1245-1256.
    • if the spelling of a language is not based on the Latin alphabet and the correct English variant of transliteration is not known, only the English translation of a publication title is provided:
      [Report about the Development of Energy Resources in China – 2007]. Ed. …(Chinese surnames must be transliterated in English ). Beijing, …, 2007 (in chin.).
Peer Review Policy. PDF
Article Requirements. PDF
License Agreement