Article Evaluation Process
Candidate articles submitted to the KONYA Art Journal of the Faculty of Fine Arts and Architecture of Necmettin Erbakan University undergo a three-stage process: preliminary review, scientific evaluation and preparation for publication. These processes are planned and implemented by editors.

Preliminary Review Process
Necmettin Erbakan University Faculty of Fine Arts and Architecture KONYA Art Journal editorial board passes a preliminary review of the works sent for evaluation and the candidate articles sent during the preliminary review process are evaluated in three dimensions:

Shape Review
Compliance with the scope of the candidate article, compliance with the originality report, compliance with the permission of the Ethics Committee, compliance with the writing rules of the KONYA Art Journal of the candidate article, compliance and timeliness of the citations are examined by the preflight officer.

Works that do not comply with the journal's writing rules and template are not evaluated and are returned to the author(s)within a maximum of 15 days for re-editing. In order for studies in this direction to be prepared in accordance with the writing rules of the Journal, the writing rules should be examined in advance.

As a result of the shape review, candidate articles that are not sufficient (eligible) may be rejected or corrected. For candidate articles that are not sufficient in the shape review, authors can reapply if they have not been rejected due to their scope.

Articles that are appropriate in terms of spelling rules and format are subject to plagiarism control at a later stage. Plagiarism inspection in KONYA art journal is carried out in accordance with the originality report uploaded by the author. Although it has been stated in scientific studies in the summer of the field that the similarity rate up to the range of 10-30% is acceptable, 30% is seen as a high rate (Shafer, 2011). The maximum similarity rate in the journal is considered to be 15%. Plagiarism report should be prepared by the author(s) and uploaded to the system.

If necessary, the editorial board may re-audit the relevant work for plagiarism. In this process, the matches that occur through the software of each study are examined in depth and the matches that are accurate in reference and attribution are extracted. As a result of extraction, the remaining matches are examined and errors are detected and reported to the editorial board. After the editorial board has made its final decision about the study in the light of the plagiarism audit report of each study, it shares this report and decision with the author(s) when necessary. Errors in the report may be asked to be corrected by the author(s), or the study may be returned to the authors.

Editorial Pre-Evaluation Process
Articles that correspond to the publication and writing rules of the journal, as well as the similarity ratio, are taken for editorial preliminary evaluation. In this process, the introduction, method, findings and discussion parts of the articles are evaluated by the editorial team in terms of the scope and objectives of the journal as well as compliance with the research reporting processes. As a result of the preliminary evaluation, articles that are not suitable for the publication and writing rules of the journal, as well as erroneous or unoriginal articles that are not suitable for their scope, are rejected without being accepted for arbitration evaluation

Preliminary Examination
* Authors are asked to report plagiarism when loading articles. The similarity rate of this report is examined by the editor and its suitability is confirmed.
* Check whether the article proposal is edited according to the journal writing guide.
* Article proposal is evaluated in accordance with the scope and subject areas of the journal.
* In the article proposal, the suitability of citations and bibliographies to the APA is evaluated.
* It is evaluated whether the required files of the articles (Copyright Notice Text, Ethics Statement form, originality Report, Title Page and main text file of the article) are loaded in a complete and accurate format.

Scientific Evaluation Process
Studies that pass the preliminary evaluation stage are transmitted to 2 referees who are experts in their field, which will be determined by editors or field editors according to the nature of the study. Referees inform the editorial board whether they can evaluate the work no later than 15 days after the article is sent to them. If the referee does not give notice within the specified time, a new referee is appointed to the work. Appointed referees may not share any documents or details about the candidate article they are reviewing with anyone. Referees participating in the Konya art magazine referee pool are considered to have given guarantees in this regard.

Necmettin Erbakan University Faculty of Fine Arts and Architecture KONYA Art Journal "double blind refereeing method" is applied in the evaluation process. The method of blind refereeing is essential for objective review of scientific studies and is preferred by many scientific journals to ensure that scientific publications are produced of the highest quality. Article evaluation process in KONYA Art Journal is carried out with the principle of double-sided blind refereeing.

The period given to the referees for the referee evaluation process is 15 days. Referees can decide on the suitability of a study by examining its corrections, as well as request corrections multiple times if necessary. When a correction is requested by the referees, the authors make their corrections no later than 15 days and transmit their work to the Journal through the same system. The work that has been corrected is re-evaluated by referees who request changes or corrections if necessary. The publication of the works is decided by the Board of Editors in accordance with the opinions of the referees. If there is a discrepancy in the opinions of the referee, the editorial board may send the work to another referee if it deems it necessary. In the article acceptance process, if the opinions of the two arbitrators are different, the decision is made by taking the opinion of the editor or a third arbitrator.

Referee Reports
Referee assessments, general studies;
• Authenticity
* Problem and purpose of the candidate article
* Importance of the subject
* Compliance of the subject with the publication policy of the journal
* Contribution to the field
* Organization of the candidate article
* Method
* Contribution of findings to field writing
• Discussion
• Result
* Consistent presentation of results
* Source conjunction and appropriateness of references in the text
• Resources
* Based on examination for compliance with ethical rules.
Referees evaluate studies using the online "referee Evaluation Form". In addition, if the referees deem it necessary, they can also Forward notes stating their suggestions and opinions on the full text to the editor/field Board.
Referees can express opinions in 4 ways:
* Publication acceptable
* Acceptable to publication after corrections
* I'd like to see it again after corrections
* Cannot Be Published (Rejection)

Opinions from referees are reviewed by the editor/s no later than 15 days. As a result of this review, it transmits its final decision to the author(s).

Necmettin Erbakan University Faculty of Fine Arts and Architecture is in Konya Art Journal, the author(s)reserves the right to object to the results of the evaluation. Author (s) referring to opinions and comments within the scope of evaluation results konyasanat@erbakan.edu.tr they must e-mail the address within 15 days of the decision being forwarded to them and upload it from the DergiPark system to the system. Objections are reviewed by the board of Editors no later than 1 month. An expert arbitrator is appointed in relation to objections made by the author(s). First, the work is examined by the referee, then a final evaluation is made along with other referee opinions, and the result is reported to the author(s).

During the preparation process for publication, the preliminary editing of the candidate article is done by the layout editor. The nominated article is directed to the authors for final reading before publication. In this process, authors may be asked to complete some edits and deficiencies, if any, in terms of shape. After the final reading of the yaazars is completed, the candidate article is assigned to be published in the earliest issue of the journal.

Below you can find some authenticity report providers.
http://www.ithenticate.com/ 
https://intihal.net/ 
https://unicheck.com/ 
https://www.duplichecker.com/ 
https://www.quetext.com/ 
http://plagiarisma.net/ 
https://www.plagscan.com/plagiarism-check/ 
https://www.checkforplagiarism.net/free-checking 
www.plagium.com