Kriterium references?

[MajaPelling]

Dear fnielsen,
Is it possible to change the title Journals to scientific books? See link: https://tools.wmflabs.org/scholia/publisher/Q57971890
It is important for Kriterium to show that it is peer review and scientific books in human science and academic discipline concerned with society and the relationships. Kriterium also has its owns ISSN: 2002-2131 Kriterium (Online). But it is not a ordinary series. It is a open acess scientific monograph series. Is it possible to show that in a good way?
All the best,
Maja Pelling

Reviewer guidlelines, Kriterium
Please prepare a summary statement of your review on 2-5 pages using the below headings. Detailed comments can be added under a separate heading or as comments directly in the manuscript. The questions given under each heading indicate what may be taken up in your comments. Please take care also to provide comments that articulate the virtues of the manuscript in addition to critique and suggestions for changes. A summary of the manuscript is not expected to be a part of your review.
Knowledge claims and themes

What are major themes? What are the main knowledge claims? Is there a reasonable scholarly contribution in relation to the research? Are the results and knowledge claims made in the text relevant and in which ways do they contribute to new knowledge

• within the specific subject area/sub-discipline?
• on a general, theoretical and/or comparative level?
  Is there anything that is particularly innovative or of greater scientific importance in the script? Are there clear grounds in the theme, the field and the scope of the work that justify a book?

Structural and linguistic clarity
Is the content and main arguments presented logically and in a well-structured and comprehensible manner or can you recommend alternative ways to structure some parts or chapters? If language editing is required, please give specific examples, specify the scope and point to the parts this applies to? Are the individual chapters well focused on what you think are essential elements of the work? Are there parts that are less relevant to the field and/or the study's main focus?

Method-theory-empirical data/sources
Is the methodological and theoretical framing of the scientific work adequate and in line with expectations in the field? If the work is based on empirical data, is it reported with the accuracy that can be expected?

Scientific context
To what extent has the text integrated starting points and results from relevant literature? Are there any missing important references or bodies of work? Are there already published books similar to or close to this work? How independent and unique can the text be considered?
Recommendation and summary of proposed changes
Would you recommend the manuscript to be accepted for publication in Kriterium? Would any major changes be necessary before accepting the manuscript for publication, and, if so, would you suggest that a revised version of the manuscipt undergoes a full review again?
Detailed comments and suggestions (may be constituted through comments directly in the manuscript)

[Daniel-Mietchen]

@MajaPelling We have not changed this to "scientific books" but to "Journals and other collections". There may be room for some more book-specific visualizations but we have not gotten around to these yet.