The journal’s activities are governed by clause 70 of the Civil Code of Russia (“The Copyright”), the international standards of scholarly publication ethics (http://publicationethics.org/resources/international-standards) developed by the COPE, and the experience of the world’s leading journals and publishers. The journal’s editor does all necessary to respect ethical provisions as established in the international research community, and to prevent violations of these provisions both in its own activity and in relations with all the participants of the scholarly publication process, including the authors, reviewers, editors, publishers, distributors, and readers.
The Editorial Board decides by majority vote which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The Editorial Board bears collective responsibility for all publications in the journal.
The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers always underwrites such decisions. The Editor may be guided by the policies of the journal editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism.
The Editorial Board should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate.
The Editorial Board has quarterly meetings to which all members of the Editorial and the Advisory Boards are invited. The members discuss submitted manuscripts and take decisions on accepting or rejecting each of them, on the ground of forehand blind peer reviewing by experts in the respective fields. The reviewers are mainly members of the Editorial and the Advisory Boards. If the Boards do not comprise enough experts in the field, external reviewers are invited. Decision on accepting or rejecting a manuscript is taken on the ground of at least three reviews. When the Editorial Board is discussing a manuscript of a member, including the Editor-in-chief, he or she does not participate and leaves the session. He or she is then informed of the decision according to the standard procedure.
The executive editor of the journal informs the authors of the decision taken by the Editorial Board. Upon request the authors receive the anonymized reports of the reviewers and are invited to amend the manuscript in line with the remarks. If the requirements have been fulfilled, the manuscript can be submitted to the Editorial Board for re-evaluation. In this case, it is reviewed as a new manuscript.
Manuscript are kept by the Editorial Board for one year.
Accepted papers are prepared for publication by the scientific editors responsible for the respective direction (ancient Asia, Greece, Rome, archaeology and epigraphy of the Northern Black Sea region, Classical philology) and by the employees of the editor. Edited manuscripts are sent to the authors for approval.
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except for the authors, reviewers, other scholarly consultants, and the publisher.
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in other research without the express written consent of the author.
The Editorial Board takes reasonably responsive measures when ethical or legal complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, including the publication of rectifications, explanations and apologies.
The reviewers must respect the rules of impartial assessment and confidentiality regarding the submitted manuscripts as specified for the Editorial Board (see above).
Any invited referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the Editorial Board and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors or institutions connected to the papers.
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge. This similarity or overlap will be reason to reject the manuscript.
Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour, are unacceptable, and constitute a ground for rejecting the manuscript.
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. All co-authors must have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors, alongside with financial support data.
The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, this has been appropriately cited or quoted. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services. Plagiarism takes many forms, from ‘passing off’ another’s paper as the author’s own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.
The manuscript must not have been published previously, in part or in whole, except as a conference abstract. The authors should ensure that the manuscript has not and will not be submitted to any other journal while still under consideration for this journal.
The authors ensure that he does not violate any laws, legal provisions or ethical conditions of the professional community. All images and other copyrighted material must by properly credited in the manuscript.
Authors should disclose in their manuscript all sources of financial support for the research, including employment, and any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript.
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in a published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the editor and cooperate with to retract or correct the paper. If the editor learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper.
The Nauka Publishing House is responsible for the layouting, press and distribution of the VDI. The Publishing House does not intervene in the journal’s contents, for which the Editor-in-chief and the Editorial Board are solely responsible.