JBCS

SCIENTIFIC MERIT .
The editors rely primarily on the referees for an assessment of the scientific merit of a submitted typescript. The criteria should be:

- SOUNDNESS – Is the work sound, so far as you can judge?
- ADDITION TO KNOWLEDGE – Will the results constitute a useful, non-trivial addition to the literature of chemistry? The work should be original, i.e. not published elsewhere, or for Articles and Short Reports, not published elsewhere, except as preliminary communications or meeting abstracts.
- COMMUNICATIONS – Does the work fulfil the criteria of novelty and urgency?

REVISION .
If the manuscript needs revision, please make specific suggestions for the guidance of the authors and editors.

- CONDENSATION – Do not hesitate to recommend condensation. Indicate which parts need shortening.
- TABLES AND FIGURES – Are all the tables and figures needed, or can some be eliminated without detriment to the presentation and make part of the supplementary material available in the Journal electronic page?
- MINOR CHANGES – Suggested minor changes and corrections can be marked directly on the manuscript. Be alert for errors that are evident only to readers with highly specialised knowledge.
- LANGUAGE – Does the text need major revision? For papers submitted by authors whose first language is not English, it is important that the referees should use their expert knowledge to remove or point out any ambiguities in the scientific content; when necessary, revision of the text by a native English speaker should be recommended.

ACCURACY .
Referees should examine all relevant details.

-  NOVEL COMPOUNDS – Are the novel compounds sufficiently well characterised? Check the consistency of the spectroscopic data in the text, figures and tables.
- NUMERICAL DATA – Examine numerical data to see whether the values support the conclusions drawn by the authors. Check the consistency of numerical data in the text, figures and tables.
- CALCULATIONS – When possible spot check calculated numerical items.
- NOMENCLATURES – Check whether symbols, units, etc. are used in accordance with IUPAC recommendations (see Instructions for Authors)
- BIBLIOGRAPHY – Please check a few bibliographic entries. Check spelling of authors’ names, journal abbreviation, year, volume, page. Does the reference cover the point the authors of the manuscript allege it covers?
- SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL – Will the supplementary material submitted for implementation in the electronic page of the Journal be useful to the readers of the papers?

SUPPORTING INFORMATION.
Referees may ask for supporting data not submitted for publication, or for sight of a previous paper, which has been submitted but not yet published.

POLICY .
It should be clearly understood that reviewers’ reports are made in confidence to the Editor, at whose discretion comments will be transmitted to the author(s). To assist the Editor, the reviewers are requested to indicate which comments are designed only for consideration, as distinct from those which, in the referee’s view, require specific action or an adequate answer before the paper is accepted.