Please complete one form for each paper reviewed.

Reviewer: Mattrick A. Atalia Date: July 26, 2021

Paper Title: 11 Gillespie-2016-Algorithm-Digital-Keywords-Peters-ed

Review Criteria Grid

Weak Satisf. Strong Criteria Comments

Assertions: clarity, The author highlights, how important the

importance usage of keywords overtime, he clarify and
Evidence: relevance, give evidence that over countries around

strength, credibility the world, they had shared the usage of
Organization: keywords, however over the countries they
 arrangement of ideas, had different languages that used to
flow define the keywords. The author gives
Mechanics: spelling, strong relevance about the language, we’re

grammar, punctuation Mr Williams give statement about the
References: complete, values of languages and say “When we come

proper to say, we don’t speak the same languages”
Overall effectiveness which definitely true for every aspects.

For the mechanics, spelling I think

there’s no problem, thus the usage of
grammar and punctuation are at ease to
read and to distinguish every word. Then

for the reference I think it was a bit
painful to see in terms of structure,
spacing, font size and of course the usage
of italic word to highlight the title of
references. Overall I’m somewhat satisfied
for effectiveness of the authors research.

Referee’s Recommendation

Action Comments
Ask author to re-write and I think the problem with his research is that there’s
resubmit multiple statement are being recycle and been used again,
I think its better to generalized all his point of view in
terms of one dimensional or straight to the point.
Reject paper for the
following listed I think for the reference which are been used to his
research’, the only problem is that the structure, and
line paragraph spacing are poorly executed in terms of
lack of spacing for each references.
TITLE: 11 Gillespie-2016-Algorithm-Digital-Keywords-Peters-ed
AUTHORS: Benjami Peters

Overall evaluation: 4 (weak accept)

Originality: 4 (good)
Thoroughness: 4 (good)
Technical Strength: 5 (excellent)
Comparison and Reference: 3 (fair)
Significance and Opportunities: 4 (good)

Overall Evaluation: Overall I’m somewhat satisfied for the topics of the author’s research case studies because I
strongly agree that even though some countries used the same keyword, the languages itself change it overtime.
Thus I agree that the technical specialists had broader usage of algorithm in terms of the meaning of words in many
aspects.

Legend(except Overall Evaluation): 1-very poor 2-poor 3-fair 4-good

5- excellent

Legend(Overall Evaluation) :Numerical Value plus description(reject, weak accepted, accepted