The article is devoted to reviewing manuscripts in the context of modern scientific communication. Attention is paid to the requirements for the reviewer, the process and types of review. Recommendations for writing a recension and the most common remarks of reviewer are given. Emphasis is placed on the ethics of peer review. The main conclusion: peer review is not punitive, but a helping, pursuing positional goals mechanism for improving the scientific level and quality of publications, a necessary and important component of an objective assessment of the activities of each scientist.
Yu. K. Abayev (Wed,) studied this question.