Evaluation Principles
1) Articles that have not been published before or are not currently being evaluated in another journal for publication and are approved by each author are accepted for evaluation.
2) Submitted articles that pass the preliminary check are scanned for plagiarism using iThenticate software.
3) Artuklu Humanities conducts a double-blind referee process. All studies will first be evaluated by the editor for suitability for the journal. Articles deemed appropriate are sent to at least two independent expert referees to evaluate the scientific quality of the article.
4) The Editor-in-Chief evaluates the articles independently of the authors' ethnicity, gender, nationality, religious beliefs and political philosophy. It ensures that articles submitted for publication are fairly evaluated by double-blind referees.
5) Chief editor; It does not allow conflict of interest among authors, editors and referees.
6) The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for the final decision regarding the acceptance or rejection of articles. The editor's decision is final.
7) Editors are not involved in decisions about articles written by themselves or their family members or colleagues, or that relate to products or services in which the editor is interested. Any such submission is subject to all of the journal's usual procedures.
8) When reviewers suspect misuse of research or publication, they should report the situation to the Editor. The Editor is responsible for taking the necessary actions in accordance with COPE guidelines.
9) In our journal, reviewers are given 20 days for the review process. This period may be extended by 10 days.
10) The article review process in our journal takes an average of 12 weeks. Depending on the responses received from referees, this period may occasionally be extended beyond the desired timeframe. Articles that cannot be published due to this unavoidable situation are transferred to the next issue, provided that the process continues, and the author is notified of the situation.

Article Evaluation Process
The article evaluation process in our journal consists of four main stages: preliminary review, peer review, revision, and publication.

1- Preliminary Examination
• The manuscript is reviewed by the editor for compliance with the journal's publication principles, academic writing rules and APA 7 System, and is scanned for plagiarism using the iThenticate programme. The similarity rate must be less than 20%. The manuscripts exceeding this rate are returned to the authors at the preliminary review stage.

2- Referee Process
• For manuscripts that pass the preliminary review stage, the Double Blind Review process is initiated. Within the scope of this process, the manuscript is sent to two referees who are experts in their fields for evaluation. During the refereeing process, the identities of the referees and authors are kept confidential and the process is carried out within the framework of the confidentiality principle. In order for a manuscript to be published in our journal, both referees must give a favourable opinion. However, if one of the referees gives a positive opinion and the other one gives a negative opinion, the manuscript is sent to a third referee for a decision.

3- Revision Process
• If reviewers request revisions, authors must mark the changes they make in their work in red. Revisions made in accordance with reviewer requests are first evaluated and checked by the editor, then by the reviewers.
• Papers that have completed the review process are reviewed by our journal's language editors. If deemed necessary, authors are asked to make revisions related to language and writing. Revisions made by authors are reviewed again by language editors and approved.

4- Publication Process
• Articles that have passed technical, academic, and linguistic reviews are typeset and laid out, made ready for publication, and published in the next issue.