Journal of the World Association of Soil and Water Conservation
Manuscript Review Form


Thank you for agreeing to review the paper below. Please complete the manuscript review form by addressing the points below and providing these and your recommendation to the Associate Editor who furnished it to you. Your comments will be helpful in making a final recommendation, and in revisions by the author.

Please furnish your name below. It will not be revealed to the author(s) of the paper.

If you are aware of this MS having been published or submitted for publication elsewhere, inform (by email) the Associate Editor immediately.

REVIEWER:
PAPER NUMBER:
TITLE:
AUTHORS
===================================================================
1. Technical Quality - Is the paper technically sound? Does it add to our body of knowledge? Are
　　there errors in computations, analysis? Are assumptions well taken?
2. Readability - Is the paper written for clarity and conciseness? WASWC is a broadly based
　　organization, terms used must be familiar to most readers. Are there a lot of abbreviations used?
3. Title - Does the title reflect the content? Can it be shortened? Does it contain key words useful in
　　searches?
4. Abstract - Can the abstract stand on its own? Does it summarize the results and conclusions? Is
　　it descriptive?
5. Key Words - Are the key words provided adequate? Should other key words be included, or should
　　some be omitted? Key words will be used for searches, so they are important.
6. Introduction - Does it clearly describe the problem(s) addressed by the paper, state the
　　objectives, and present pertinent background information? The introduction should not be a
　　summary of the paper. Is it brief?
7. Methods - Were appropriate techniques used in the study? Are methods explained adequately?
　　Are there other methods that should be applied? All data used should be cited or presented in full.
　　Quantities throughout manuscript should be presented in SI units.
8. Body of Manuscript - Is it organized and presented in a logical sequence that contains the basic
　　information, interpretation of that information, and results or conclusions of the interpretations?
9. Illustrations and Tables - Are they understandable without the text? Are they all necessary? Are
　　they easy to read. Are they referred to in the text?
10. Conclusions or Results - Do they represent major findings in the paper? Answer objectives? Are
　　they supported by the data and analysis in the paper?
11. Literature Cited - Are all citations in text included in this section? Are they cited correctly in
　　text? Was pertinent literature omitted? Are webpages cited?.
===========================================================================
RECOMMENDATION:
___ Accept the paper essentially as is.
___Accept after minor revisions (no further review required).
___ Return to the author with the understanding that it will be reconsidered after major revisions (further review required).
___ Return to author as the paper is unsuitable for publication in JWASWC (provide reasons below).
===========================================================================
===========================================================================