In order to maintain the quality of the manuscript and avoid publishing/plagiarism violations in the publishing process, the editorial board establishes the ethics of scholarly publications of the Walennae journal. The ethical provisions of this publication apply to authors, editors, reviewers, and journal managers.

 

Author Ethics

1. Reporting; the author must provide information about the process and the results of his research to the editorial in an honest, clear, and comprehensive, and still keep the research data well and safely
2. Originality and plagiarism; the author must ensure that the manuscript that has been submitted to the editors is the original, written by himself, sourced from his own ideas, rather than plagiarizing the writings or ideas of others. Authors are strictly prohibited from passing the name of the reference source cited to someone else's name.
3. Repetition of delivery; the author must inform that the manuscript submitted to the editor is a script that has never been submitted to other journal publishers/publications. If there is any redundancy in the submission of a manuscript to another publisher, then the editor will reject the submitted manuscript.
4. Author status; the author should inform the editor that the author has the competence or qualification in a particular field of expertise in accordance with the field of publications, namely archeology, anthropology, history, and culture. The author must include the affiliate, ie the origin of the author's agency. The author who submits the manuscript to the editor is the first author (co-author), so that if problems found in the process of publishing, it can be completed soon.
5. Error writing script; the author should immediately inform the editor if found errors in the scriptwriting, both the results of reviews and edits. Writing errors include the writing of names, affiliations/agencies, quotations, and other writings that can reduce the meaning and substance of the script. If that happens, the author should immediately propose the repair of the manuscript.
6. Disclosure of conflict of interest; the author must understand the ethics of scientific publications above to avoid any conflict of interest with other parties, so the script can be processed smoothly and safely

 

Editor Ethics

1. The decision of publication; editors should ensure a thorough, transparent, objective, fair and prudent review of the text. It becomes the basis of the editor in making a decision on a script, rejected or accepted. In this case, the editorial board acts as a screening team.
2. Publication information; editors should ensure that scriptwriting guidelines for authors and other interested parties can be accessed and read clearly, both printed and electronic.
3. The distribution of peer-reviewed manuscripts; editors should make sure reviewers and manuscripts for review, as well as inform the provisions and process of reviewing the manuscript clearly to reviewers.
4. Objectivity and neutrality; editors should be objective, impartial, and honest in editing the manuscript, regardless of gender, the business side, ethnicity, religion, race, inter-group, and author's citizenship.
5. Confidentiality; editors should keep every information well, especially with regard to the author's privacy and distribution of the manuscript.
6. Disclosure of conflict of interest; editors should understand the ethics of the above scientific publications to avoid any conflict of interest with others, so the process of publishing the manuscript runs smoothly and safely.

 

Reviewer Ethics

1. Objectivity and neutrality; the reviewer must be honest, objective, unbiased, independent, and only in favor of scientific truth. The process of reviewing the manuscript is done professionally regardless of gender, business side, tribe, religion, race, inter-group, and author's citizenship.
2. Clarity of reference sources; the reviewer should ensure that the reference resource/quotation is appropriate and credible (accountable). If errors or irregularities are found in the reference source/quotation writing, the reviewer should promptly inform the editor to be repaired by the author according to the reviewer's note.
3. Peer-reviewed effectiveness; the reviewer should respond to the manuscript submitted by the editor and work in accordance with the specified peer-review time (maximum of 3 weeks). If additional time is required in the review the manuscript should promptly report (confirmation) to the editorial secretariat.
4. Disclosure of conflict of interest; the reviewer should understand the ethical publications above to avoid any conflict of interest with others, so the process of publishing the manuscript runs smoothly and safely.

 

Journal Manager Ethics

1. Decision-making; the manager of the journal/editorial board should describe the mission and objectives of the organization, especially those relating to the determination of policy and decision of journal publishing without any particular interest.
2. Freedom; journal managers should give the reviewers and editors the freedom to create a comfortable working atmosphere and respect the privacy of the author
3. Warranty and promotion; journal managers must guarantee and protect intellectual property rights (copyright), as well as transparent in managing funds received by third parties. In addition, journal organizers should publish and promote publication results to the public by providing assurance of usefulness in the use of the manuscript.
4. Disclosure of conflict of interest; journal managers must understand the ethics of scientific publications above to avoid any conflict of interest with other parties, so the process of publishing the manuscript runs smoothly and safely.