Wulfenia | Members of the Editorial Board and Reviewers

The editor-in-chief of Wulfenia is responsible for deciding which of the papers submitted should be published. She/He confers with the editorial board and reviewers in making her/his decisions. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always underwrite such decisions. The editorial board is insisting on legal requirements and excludes libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism.

Papers previously submitted to the so-called, fraudulent “Multidisciplinary Wulfenia” (see warning on the homepage) are rejected. Wulfenia does not accept attempts to submit papers already published by “Multidisciplinary Wulfenia” to gain legal status.

Editors ensure that the peer review process is fair, timely and unbiased. They follow best practice in avoiding the selection of fraudulent peer reviewers. Submitted papers must be reviewed by two independent reviewers, additional opinions should be obtained if necessary. Reviewers shall have excellent expertise in the relevant field and potential conflicts of interest should be excluded.

Editors and reviewers of Wulfenia evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, religious belief, ethnic origin, gender, sexual orientation, citizenship or political philosophy of the authors.

Attempts to influence the journal’s ranking by artificially increasing any journal metric are not allowed. Editors and reviewers do not require that references to Wulfenia’s articles have to be included except for genuine scholarly reasons and authors should not be required to include references to the editor’s own articles or products and services which are of interest to the editor or reviewer.

Editors and reviewers protect the confidentiality of all material submitted to Wulfenia and all communications with reviewers. Reviewers’ identities keep protected. Communication with authors is carried out solely by the editor-in-chief. Unpublished materials of a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's or reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.

Editors and reviewers must not be involved in decisions about papers written by themselves or by family members or colleagues or which relate to products or services in which they have an interest.

Peer review is an essential part of scientific communication. It assists authors in improving their papers and editors in making editorial decisions. Editors and reviewers treat authors and their work fair and with correct behaviour. If reviewers feel unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or know that its prompt review will be impossible, they have to notify the editor-in-chief and decline to participate in the review process.