Pre-Revolutionary “Mining Journal”: Towards Elements of Internal Scientific Expertise

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.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Общество философия история культура
Published
2024-10-23
DOI
https://doi.org/10.24158/fik.2024.10.28
Primary Topic
Geotechnical and Geomechanical Engineering
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Pre-Revolutionary “Mining Journal”: Towards Elements of Internal Scientific Expertise

Sergey D. Batishchev
Общество философия история культура
Geotechnical and Geomechanical Engineering
article

Pre-Revolutionary “Mining Journal”: Towards Elements of Internal Scientific Expertise

Sergey D. Batishchev
article en

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.

Общество философия история культура(10)
Openalex Percentile: Top 80%
Geotechnical and Geomechanical Engineering
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.