Yahoo Web Search

  1. Authors maintain 100% ownership rights over their work and get 90% of sales proceeds. Expert editorial, design, distribution, publicity & website services to select authors.

Search results

  1. Apr 2, 2024 · A Publishers Weekly review is the most highly regarded review in the publishing industry. It is a capsule book review of about 200 words. PW reviews are primarily geared toward helping booksellers and librarians decide which books to purchase. Reviews are written by experts in the book's genre or field, and are published anonymously in ...

    • Pw Select

      When you register, your book receives an announcement...

    • Need Help

      Our site is full of great opportunities to help you get the...

    • The Booklife Prize

      Each Critic’s Report consists of a brief written critical...

    • About Booklife

      About. BookLife is a website from Publishers Weekly...

  2. Oct 13, 2021 · Here are some of the prices for Kirkus Reviews: Traditional Reviews: Costs $425 for a 250-word review. Expanded Reviews: Costs $525 for a 500-word review. Picture Book Reviews: Cost $350 for a 200-word review. All of the reviews are turned around in 7-9 weeks but can be expedited for an additional fee. After receiving your review, you can add ...

  3. Jun 5, 2024 · Make sure your book is eligible. For a book to be eligible for review consideration, it must be written in English and available, or about to be available, for purchase in the United States. Books submitted to BookLife Reviews can be up to 150,000 words long. There is no length limit for Publishers Weekly review consideration.

    • Approvals Process For Books
    • Peer Review of Proposals
    • Overview
    • Reviewers
    • Review Timescales and Expectations
    • Editorial Assessment of Reviews
    • Editorial Decision on Proceeding with The Proposal
    • Provision of Review Feedback
    • Response to Reviews
    • Editorial Decision on Author’S Response to Reviews

    Oxford University Press (OUP) welcomes proposals from all authors: researchers and professionals at any stage in their career (including first-time authors). Our publishing is driven by quality and committed to diversity, equity, and inclusion. We offer advice on submitting a proposal. At any point, you can contact the Editor at the Press you consi...

    Peer review is an essential part of our publishing process and a fundamental principle of scholarly discourse. and the validation and communication of research findings and outputs. Peer review provides for the assessment of research by appropriately qualified peers and stakeholders, taking account of current knowledge, know-how, and prevailing sta...

    Following an initial editorial assessment that the proposal should proceed to peer review, our standard treatment of book proposals is to follow a review process whereby the reviewers will receive the full proposal, including information about the author as well as any sample chapters and original thesis submitted, and the author will be provided w...

    Selection of reviewers

    OUP believes that the selection of reviewers is of fundamental importance to the quality of the review process. Editors will use their knowledge of the area and existing contacts to identify and prioritise a list of potential reviewers. Our policy is to avoid reviewers who may have a conflict of interests, and to that end we will aim to avoid approaching reviewers who are in the same faculty or who are recent colleagues of the proposing author. OUP will aim to provide a suitable balance of re...

    Nominating reviewers

    Whilst OUP will normally expect to identify and select appropriate reviewers, the proposing author can provide a note of reviewers they consider would be well-placed to review the work should they wish. OUP does not commit to approach any reviewers suggested by a proposing author but may take these suggestions into account in planning the review process.

    Blocking reviewers

    Blocking reviewers is to be avoided where possible, and it is rarely requested or invoked. However, if there is a reason why a proposing author wishes that certain individuals are not approached for review, they can notify the Editor, providing some indication as to why they consider that individual either unsuitable or unable to provide a fair review, or why providing that reviewer with the proposal might lead to other detrimental consequences for the proposed work.

    We recognise that there is a balance to be struck between the timely advancement of a book proposal and allowing a reasonable time for a reviewer to complete their review to an appropriate standard. The time required to complete peer reviews is dependent both on the time needed to secure appropriate reviewers and the time they, in turn, require to ...

    On receipt, the editor will read the reviewer feedback and determine whether the review is comprehensive and of a suitable quality and whether, taken together, the reviews provide an appropriate level of feedback on the project’s quality, its aims, scope, and approach, and its weaknesses and strengths. Peer reviewers will also consider the expertis...

    The editorial assessment of the peer reviews may lead to one of three main types of decision. First, it may be clear that the work as proposed has fundamental flaws and the proposal will be rejected. In such circumstances the Editor will determine whether information from reviews can be shared with the proposing author to help them understand the d...

    When the editor is confident that a suitable set of reviews is available, the reviews will be anonymised and sent to the proposing author for their consideration with an invitation for the author to provide their response to the reviews. The author will be asked to indicate how long they will require to consider the reviews and provide a response.

    The author’s response to the reviews can take a number of forms including inline comments, a separate schedule by reviewer, or a thematic response, but should involve a clear statement of the extent to which the reviews have been of assistance, where the author agrees or disagrees with the reviewer feedback, any further work they wish to undertake ...

    Ideally, the response to the reviews will mean that the Press can be confident of the quality and value of the project and that, where appropriate, the author has taken advantage of the reviews to improve the quality of the work as proposed. In these circumstances, the editor can proceed with internal approval of the proposal and provide a pack of ...

  4. booklife.com › about-us › reviews-faqsReviews FAQs - BookLife

    The review process for BookLife books -- from the time a book is selected for review until the review's publication in the magazine -- can take 12 weeks or longer. When the review of your book is published, we will notify you via email with a link to the online version of your review. However, being selected for a review is no guarantee of one.

  5. We work hard at Palgrave Macmillan to make the peer review process as efficient as possible. We know that authors need feedback quickly and, as a result, we manage review deadlines carefully. While review times vary according to a book’s peer review needs, most of our potential authors receive comments in 2-3 months’ time. When a reviewer ...

  6. People also ask

  7. During the Covid-19 pandemic, The New York Times Book Review is operating remotely and will accept physical submissions by request only. If you wish to submit a book for review consideration, please email a PDF of the galley at least three months prior to scheduled publication to booksassistant@nytimes.com.

  1. People also search for