Review of an article submitted to the conference

Approval status: Accept without acknowledging of remarks
Date Published: 02.05.2019 - 15:21
The article's title reflects the content and purpose of the article? 
Was the aim of the work clearly defined and successfully accomplished? 
Does the article embrace contemporary issues in the area? 
Does the article contain new and not published results? 
I do not know
Was the article clearly written and easily understood? 
Easily understood
Conclusions illustrate the research results, recommendations and giving suggestions for future research 
The references are full and grounded? 
How adequate was the writing and used terminology? 
Remarks and suggestions to the authors of the article 

Dear authors, make corrections, please:
correct the title of the article (for example, ‘’Template for the Camera Ready’’ - Preparative Synthesis of 1–fluorocyclopropyl Carboxylic Acid Derivatives)
Name Surname (Author 1)1, Name Surname (Author 2)2
(use Times New Roman, 12pt, centered, speaker’s name is underlined)
1. Department, University, COUNTRY, City, Street address, E-mail: author1atyourdomain [dot] com
(use Times New Roman, 10pt, center)
2. Department, University, COUNTRY, City, Street address, E-mail: author2atyourdomain [dot] com
(use Times New Roman, 10pt, center)
correct references according to the example:
[1] J. K. Author, “Title of chapter in the book,” in Title of His Published Book, xth ed. City of Publisher, Country if not USA: Abbrev. of Publisher, year, ch. x, sec. x, pp. xxx–xxx.
[2] J. K. Author, “Title of paper,” in Unabbreviated Name of Conf., City of Conf., Abbrev. State (if given), year, pp. xxx-xxx.
We are waiting for an updated version of the article.

I confirm that there is no conflict of interests regarding reviewed article. 
I have read this submission. I believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard.