What Makes a Good Review Article or Profile « Classics# « Cambridge Core Blog

Clicks: 4
ID: 287862
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Star

Ranked #174 of 1,244 articles by views in ADVANCES IN ARCHAEOLOGICAL PRACTICE

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 1,244 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Classical Review has recently expanded its standard work of publishing reviews and notices of single books to include also longer pieces covering more – and more varied – material. We have previously shared ideas about what makes a good book review and on our work in reviewing digital projects. Here we shed light on how
Reference Key
persistent_1761420001_68fd22e172376 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors
Journal ADVANCES IN ARCHAEOLOGICAL PRACTICE
Year Year not found
DOI
DOI not found
URL
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.