When reviewing full papers for an International Mine Water Association (IMWA) conference or Congress, it’s important to ensure that submissions meet high scientific and topical standards. IMWA seeks high-quality papers contributing to the understanding, management and sustainability of mine water systems. Although IMWA doesn’t have strict guidelines for reviewers, the following tips will help you to evaluate papers fairly, accurately and consistently in line with IMWA’s objectives.
When you have finished reading and reviewing the paper, please give the authors valuable advice on how to improve their full paper. Sentences such as “Bad paper, must be rejected.” or “Very good. Accept as is.” are not helpful to the authors or the editor. Please provide clear, respectful suggestions on how and where the authors could improve their text, images or references. You can directly comment on the author’s manuscript or write in the form provided by ConfTool.
If you are commenting directly in the author’s Word file, you may want to learn how to remove your personal information so that your comments are anonymous. Please follow this link for instructions
- Use of AI in peer review To protect authors’ rights and research confidentiality, IMWA does not currently allow the use of Generative AI or AI-assisted technologies such as ChatGPT or similar services for peer review. We are actively evaluating compliant AI tools and may revise this policy. Should we notice the use of artificial intelligence-based LLMs, such as ChatGPT, as we will delete both the review and the reviewer from our database.
- Relevance to mine water science and practice Begin by assessing whether the Full Paper is within the scope of the Conference, which includes topics such as mine water hydrology, water treatment, hydrogeology, geochemistry, environmental impacts, and emerging technologies in mine water management (detailed list on the Conference web page). Ensure that the topic is appropriate for the Conference and that the research provides insights that are valuable to professionals in the mine water community. Ask yourself, if the Full Paper is of relevance and if you would like to read it.
- Scientific quality and originality Evaluate the originality of the research. Look for innovative approaches or novel findings that advance the field. Full Papers should represent well-designed studies, sound methodology and rigorous analysis. Look for clarity in the presentation of objectives, methods, results and conclusions. Full Papers that are too vague or lack detailed methodology may indicate insufficient scientific quality.
- Structure and clarity A well-structured Full Paper will help reviewers and participants to quickly understand the purpose, results and relevance of the study. IMWA Full Papers should ideally contain four parts: the background or problem statement, the approach or methodology, the main results and the conclusions. Each part should be clear, concise and free from jargon or ambiguity. Clarity of communication is essential as it demonstrates the author’s ability to communicate complex ideas effectively.
- Practical implications and contributions to mine water management IMWA places a high value on applied research that can benefit mine water practitioners. Consider the practical applications of the research, particularly if it proposes solutions, frameworks or technologies that could be adopted by the industry. Full Papers should ideally address real-world issues and present findings that could aid decision making, improve mine water quality or support environmental sustainability.
- Technical accuracy and writing quality Accurate and polished Full Papers enhance credibility. Ensure that the Full Paper is free of grammatical errors, spelling mistakes, technical inaccuracies and inconsistencies. Poor language quality can detract from otherwise good research and hinder understanding. Flag any sections that need rewriting for clarity or accuracy. Ensure that the terms impact (except for environmental or meteorite impact), significant (except for statistical analysis) and heavy metals are not used in the title or the Full Paper.
- Did the authors use MWEN reference styles? Please ensure that the authors used the “Mine Water and the Environment” (MWEN) reference style. MWEN is not using numbers for citing. That’s how a reference shall look like: Brown MC, Wigley TC, Ford, DC (1969) Water budget studies in karst aquifers. J Hydrology 9:113–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022–1694(69)90018–3
- Did the authors use the IMWA conference template? Please verify that the authors use the conference template and not any other template or manuscript style. This is important to ensure a smooth publishing process.
- Respect ethical standards Finally, ensure that the Full Paper meets ethical standards in research, such as proper data handling, acknowledgment of sources and, where relevant, adherence to safety and environmental protocols. Full Papers that demonstrate ethical integrity reflect the high standards upheld by IMWA.
By following these guidelines, reviewers can contribute to the success of IMWA conferences and ensure that only the highest quality and relevant research or case studies are presented to advance mine water science and practice.