To maintain the appropriate level of scientific rigor, the Mineralogical Journal (Ukraine) uses single-blind review: personal data of the reviewer do not reveal to the author/authors. Reviewers adhere to ethical principles, stated in section Publication Ethics.
Accepted for consideration manuscripts of articles that contain new original research and data have never been printed. The results of research and their method of preparation should be laid down in such a way as to be able to perform an independent review of the conclusions.
For publication in the Journal article should get at least two positive reviews. After registration of the manuscript in the wording of the executive secretary of the Editorial Board sends it to one of the members of the Editorial Board, whose research interests coincide with the theme of the article, and assigns him responsible for reviewing the manuscript. As a general rule, a member of the editorial board of becoming one of the reviewers, and encourages the other of the number of well-known experts in this field of research. The Editorial Board may refer, if necessary, an article to the two or more reviewers are not included in its composition. Reviewers evaluate the materials provided to them in terms of novelty, matching their topics of the Journal, consistency of the research, the results of the presentation sequence, argumentation of conclusions, preparation of the manuscript. If there are reviewers comments, recommendations or questions, the executive secretary of the editorial board, on condition of anonymity, sends them to the author (s). Article considered to be prepared for discussion at the meeting of the Editorial Board will be satisfied if the reviewers make a correction or response of the author.
Meeting of the Editorial Board take place on a quarterly basis. Shortly before each meeting of all members of the Editorial Board for review are sent a summary of all the articles that are currently enrolled in the editor, in two languages - English ahd Ukrainian. Each member of the Editorial Board also has the ability to read the full text of any articles which it will be sent on request. Manuscript received positive reviews, recommended for publication only after discussion at the meeting. Members of the Editorial Board, who were unable to attend the meeting, send their comments and recommendations in writing. The defining criteria for a scientific article recommendations are valuable, its relevance and the interest of a particular readership.
The submitted articles are checked for wrongful appropriations using automated system as UniCheck.
If plagiarism or autoplagiarism is revealed, the manuscript is rejected.
If the manuscript contains appropriated text, figures, tables or illustrations without references to the original source, it is rejected.
If at least a quarter of the manuscript is plagiarized it is rejected and the authors and the affiliated institutions are informed.
The percentage of plagiarism is determined using automatic systems and evaluated by the Editorial Board.