ARLIS/NA Reviews Reviewer Guidelines

Materials to be Reviewed:

1. Publications will be selected from a broad range of art, design, and architecture material, especially those of a reference or professional nature. Materials are not restricted to titles that fall within the traditional "N" classification of the Library of Congress system, but instead may include books concerned with art, architecture, interior architecture, historic preservation, fashion design, landscape architecture, and performance and video art. Materials that are selected for review must first be approved by the Review Editor.



2. Appropriate types of materials include:
   • reference materials
   • foreign language publications
   • exhibition catalogues
   • catalogues raisonnes
   • regional art publications
   • monographs and standard publications



3. Publications to be reviewed should fit the following criteria:
   • specific interest to art and architecture librarians
   • less than two year old
   • not reviewed in most other library literature

Review Guidelines

1. Reviews should be written for the art and architecture librarian to use as a selection aid and for reference self-education. The following should be considered and noted in the review when relevant:
   • brief analysis of the item's content
   • intended audience or level
   • style and quality of writing, design, and production
   • type and quality of illustrations or reproductions
   • evaluative comments, comparing to other works on the same subject
   • scholarly apparatus (e.g., indexes, appendixes, bibliographies)
   • physical structure (e.g., durability of binding, signatures, paper quality)



2. Reviews of reference titles should be a maximum of 1,000 words. Reviews of monographs, exhibition catalogues, and other standard publications should be a maximum of 650 words.



3. Reviewers who wish to be notified of editorial changes in reviews before publication or who wish to make further changes themselves, must request notification when submitting the review, or contact the Review Editor before deadline. Otherwise, all editorial decisions are at the discretion of the Review Editor in collaboration with the editors of Art Documentation.

Technical Procedures

1. All reviews should be signed by the reviewer and include place of employment or residence.



2. The Chicago Manual of Style should be consulted for grammar and style questions.



3. Due dates of four to six weeks will be assigned. There is no guarantee a review will be included in a given issue, though the editors try to include as many reviews as possible. A review received after the due date may or may not included in the next issue as space permits.



4. Titles reviewed for Art Documentation may not be reviewed for another publication by the same reviewer.



5. Reviews which do not meet standards for content or length will be edited by the Review Editor or may be returned to the reviewer for revision.



6. Reviewers should retain a copy of their review for their records.



7. Listed below are additional style guidelines:
   • avoid the use of noun strings, jargon, and trendy expressions
   • avoid split infinitives
   • numbers one through ten are spelled out; thereafter use arabic numbers
   • gender-neutral phrasing is preferred
   • preferred word forms: online, videodisk, 1980s, library catalog, exhibition catalogue, nineteenth century (noun), nineteenth-century (adjective)
   • all titles of publications should be italicized, not underlined

Submitting a Review

1. Reviews will be accepted in the following formats:
   • Via email to: jstahl@umd.edu
   • On disc. Label the disc with your name and the file name and mail to:

     Joan Stahl
     Branch Manager
     Art and Architecture Libraries
     University of Maryland
     2213 Art-Sociology Building
     College Park, MD 20742
     
     Discs will not be returned.

   • By fax to: (301) 314-9725



2. Start your review with the bibliographic citation.



3. Reviews received after the deadline will be considered for inclusion in Art Documentation at the discretion of the Review Editor.