The Encyclopedia of Geosciences is a compilation of review articles published in the EGU journals on geoscientific topics. These review articles are accessible either via topics and keywords or via an alphabetical index. In order to ensure high quality, the Encyclopedia articles undergo the usual reviewing and acceptance process in their partner journals. However, not every review article is well suited as an Encyclopedia article.
Some additional criteria
- The topical coverage of the article should be consistent with the topic list of the Encyclopedia.
- If the article is one of a series of similarly structured articles, it may be advisable to use an existing article as a sort of template. The editors of the Encyclopedia will give you advice on which existing articles can serve as a model for your article.
- The article shall not be over-specialized but should also be accessible to scientifically educated non-specialists. That means that all technical terms known only to specialists of the sub-topic should be defined and related concepts need to be introduced. Still, the depth of the article should be such that specialists also benefit from reading it.
- For a review article no new results are required but the article should be complete in a sense that it refers to all relevant literature, from the early history of the particular research field to the cutting edge of contemporary research.
- A review paper is not a position paper. In the case of topics under dispute a fair and balanced overview over the main positions is required.
- Please use a standard notation and adjust your notation to that of existing topically related articles. The reader will not want to struggle through different notations in different articles on related topics.
- In summary, use the following thought experiment as a guideline: imagine you are new in a particular research field but due to your reputation and experience in another field you are expected to be productive without extensive delay. In particular, you are supposed to actively participate in related project meetings. Which kind of article would help you most to prepare for this task?
If your review article has not been solicited but should be a contributed paper please consider the following points.
- Follow the guidelines for submission of review articles of the relevant partner journal. Depending on the journal, you may be required to first contact the executive editors of the journal to obtain approval for submission of a review article.
- Contact one of the editors of the Encyclopedia and provide the following information:
- title of the review article;
- authors list;
- position of the review article in the topical organization of the Encyclopedia.
- Please list
- the full path (e.g. atmosphere/processes and phenomena/constituents of the atmosphere/organics: hydrocarbons/methane in the atmosphere);
- a short summary of the content and the planned organization of the article;
- a short CV;
- a few sentences on why you think that you are a suitable author for this particular paper.
Checklist for Encyclopedia articles
The following checklist for Encyclopedia articles is applicable in addition to the regular criteria listed on the partner journal's website:
- Has the content of the article been agreed upon with the responsible editor of the Encyclopedia?
- Is the interfacing with other Encyclopedia articles clear?
- Does the article cover all relevant aspects of the topic?
- Is the structure of the article compatible with the Encyclopedia in a sense that it is similarly structured to existing articles on a similar topic? If not, is there a good reason for a deviating structure?
- Are all technical terms and concepts which are only known by specialists defined and explained?
- Is the article historically complete in a sense that the work of the pioneers in this field is adequately acknowledged?
- Is the article up to date in a sense that it also includes references to the most recent literature in this field?
- Is the discussion of issues where there is disagreement within the community balanced? Are arguments and counterarguments of all relevant positions presented?
- Is the notation and terminology used consistent with that of existing Encyclopedia articles?