To evaluate an article submitted to the system, follow these steps:
1. Log in with your username and password.
2. Select TAHKİK Journal from the top menu to log in.
3. Click the “Articles in Process” button on the left.
4. On the page that opens, you will see the name and status of the article you are asked to evaluate. Click on the article name.
5. On the new page that opens, you will be asked whether you accept to evaluate the article. To accept, you must click on the “I Want to Evaluate” button in the green section.
6. After accepting the review, you can download the article file by clicking on the “Review Version” heading in the dialog box. You can review the article by clicking on the “Fill Out and Submit Form” link on the same page. Note: The online referee form opens without any problems in the CHROME browser; however, errors may occur in EXPLORER due to security settings.
7. After filling out the entire form, you must click the “Save and Finish” button.
8. If you have an additional file that you have made corrections to, you can upload it to the system from the ADD FILE-SEND section.

Contribution to the Evaluation Process
• Research articles and reviews published in our journal undergo peer review by experts in the field under a double-blind peer review system.
• Once assigned and accepting the task through the system, reviewers are obligated to consider the “Reviewer Evaluation Criteria” during the evaluation process.
• Indicates that other articles, works, sources, citations, rules, and similar deficiencies related to the article should be completed.
• Reviewers should identify relevant published works that have not been cited by the authors.
• Should immediately inform the editor if they are unable to review the article for any reason.
• If a reviewer believes that any of their own work could contribute to the text, they should only offer this to the author in a way that does not compromise the double-blind review process.
Confidentiality
• Reviewers should not share information contained in a study assigned to them for review with others before publication.
• Reviewers acknowledge that the works submitted for review are the private property of the authors. This also applies to reviewers who decline a review invitation.
• The names of reviewers who conduct evaluations are not disclosed/published.
• Since our journal employs double-blind peer review, author/reviewer information is not included in the article file. File information from files uploaded by reviewers/authors to Dergipark is deleted by the editorial team.
Impartiality
• Reviewers must be objective in their decision to publish the research they review.
• Comments on the article proposal should be impartial and suggestions should be made in a way that authors can use to improve the article.
• Personal criticism of authors is inappropriate.
Ethics
• If reviewers detect any ethical violations, plagiarism, etc. in the work at any stage of the evaluation process, they must inform the Editor.
Conflicts of interest
• If there is any conflict of interest or assignment outside the reviewer's area of expertise during the review process, it is recommended that they inform the Editor and, if necessary, withdraw from the review.
Fees
• Reviewers are not paid for their review/evaluation work.

***(Our journal's referee guidelines were created and edited with reference to the Hittite Theology Journal.)