Comments for Scholarly Open Access

what about Libertas Academica?

I have read the article, I think it is the biggest scientific hoax in this century, the article is written with not only grammatical mistakes, but also with scientific mistakes, the methodology is questioned too, as all the results and conclusions were drawn subjectively, anyone can claim whatever and test it on whoever…
What the Egyptian military trying to prove is that they are achieving something, while they are destroying everything in Egypt. For the last sixty year they were controlling and consuming about half of the gross national Egyptian income, they fail in everything, economy, policy, security etc. to come at the end with this scandal, by doing this they disgrace and embraced all Egyptians and Arabs.

[…] sulla Sindone di Torino e ne pubblica i risultati a pagamento su riviste del famigerato editore Academic Journals. Nel 2011 su una rivista più dignitosa, pubblicava una rassegna critica dei lavori suoi e altrui, […]

what about Libertas Academica

Well well ….
Look here:
http://www.europeanjournalofscientificresearch.com/ejsr_abstracting.html
http://www.americanjournalofscientificresearch.com/
Probably the victims of publish fast will be offered to pay the article processing charges in these journals.
Both journals has been covered by WOS (now dropped) but probably they are still covered by Scopus …

[…] impact factor called World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, which is listed as a potential predatory publisher, publishing hoaxes and poorly peer reviewed or non-reviewed […]

Thanks for your time in answering my requests Sir. Now, I have a couple of questions about some characteristics of predatory publishers/journals.

1. Some open-access journals with sufficiently questionable information (such as the “contact us” info, spelling and grammar problems, etc) explicitly provide assurance of no APC on their websites. Now, do they qualify as predatory journals? And if not, what are most likely their intentions?

2. In addition to my previous set of questions, can you please take a look again on American Scientific Publishers (http://www.aspbs.com/)? This publisher has a wide array of journals in various fields. I really doubt about their address as indicated in their website. I try to search it in Google but can’t find one.

3. Yes, you are correct that Industrial and Systems Engineering Review needs one to have log-in info. But logging in their website doesn’t need one to have subscription fee. Do they still not qualify as open access?

4. International Journal of Research in Management, Science and Technology which is, as you said, a stand-alone journal in South Asia indicates that they are supported by Prannath Parnami Universe, a university in Haryana, India. Their address also is co-located with the University’s address. They also indicate in their website that they have no APC. What are your views on them? Do they qualify as a predatory journal?

Thanks ahead Sir.

This APC works in our favor in the sense that publishers are effectively forced to find reviewers for us which subscription journals generally would not do. In this way our work evaluated and decided according to its merits

1. The question is, If a journal says there’s no APC, then it can’t be a predatory journal, right? The answer: no, not always. Many corrupt publishers waive fees at first because they quickly want to populate their journals with articles, articles that in turn will help attract other articles and their accompanying APCs.

2. I haven’t analyzed this publisher; it’s not an open-access publisher.

3. No, by definition, if you have to create a login and password and then sign in to access content, it’s not open access.

4. I don’t know. There are too many standalone journals like this one (megajournals, warehouse journals) emerging out of South Asia for me to analyze — around ten new ones a week. I am no longer able to keep up with them. I have started a backlog, which I’ll make available soon.

Nationalpark-Forschung in der Schweiz
This journal is definitely hijacked and the site is faked, but the only place in which it is mentioned on the WEB is here. It is publishing more than 50 papers per month and God knows how much money they have received from poor authors. Why there is nothing about this fraud on the WEB and even the real publisher is silent.

Please leave comments that will help me improve this page. Thanks.

Jeffrey Beall, MDPI is an excellent publisher. I have published 3 papers all with helpful comments and great peer review.
You must release MDPI from your predatory publishers.
MDPI is a fantastic publisher with many ISI Journals.
You cannot put MDPI in the list of questionable publishers!!!!

[…] Beall doesn’t trust the intentions (and with it, the quality) of another publisher, but Peter Murray-Rust disputes Beall’s conclusions because the quality of the reasoning is […]

Hi Robert J,

If MDPI is an “excellent publisher”, why was “peer review” in the case of its extraordinarily faulty Australian Paradox paper either non-existent, incompetent or ignored?

If MDPI is an excellent publisher, why does it not retract the obviously false high-profile “finding” that there is “an inverse relationship” between sugar consumption and obesity?
http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/backgroundbriefing/2014-02-09/5239418

I think you might agree that the authors’ own charts tend to point up not down: Figures 1-5 in http://www.australianparadox.com/pdf/GraphicEvidence.pdf

[…] See on scholarlyoa.com […]

Thank you Sir for answering all my questions. Keep up your good work. You’re really an eye opener to the academic community.

Sure, thank you.

[…] Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2013 […]

[…] Gdy przychodzi Wam do głowy wysłać coś do nowego obiecującego czasopisma OA, warto zerknąć czy przypadkiem nie jest jednym z Potential, possible, or probable predatory scholarly open-access publishers […]

i forgot the guy in the picture
isn’t he Stephen Glenn the American actor?

Latest Images