You made many attacks against MDPI. This is unfair. I have published some papers in MDPI and I received very good comments and a real review from the reviewers. MDPI has real review. Why do you attack them? Please, remove them from your list immediately. I have published all the original work from my Ph.D. in MDPI. You must not destroy me and many others.
Please, tell me why do you hate MDPI and SCIRP.
Comment on IDOSI Journals No Longer to be Indexed in Scopus by Le Shp
↧
↧
Comment on Appeals by Said Bin M S
Dear, Sir
Few days back I saw ‘Science Publishing Group’ in your, but no longer exist! Why you decided to remove it?
↧
Comment on IDOSI Journals No Longer to be Indexed in Scopus by Manuel Montenegro
I just entered Scopus and found that IDOSI journals are still there. I browsed “Global Veterinaria” and searched for specific articles of the journal and, both ways, could find their articles indexed in the database. So, they will keep the articles until 2014 (as you say on your post: «Retrospective indexing data will be retained in the database»).
Well, that doesn’t solve the problem. Better than nothing, anyway…
↧
Comment on Research by Zaki Shakir Seddigi
Dear Jeffrey Beall,
I would request you to kindly consider IOSR JOURNALS http://www.iosrjournals.org and check whether it is a predatory Publisher or not. They mention high Impact factor of their journals.
I also request to make list of fake Impact Factor Journals list so authors will not submit paper and save their hard earned money.
Zaki
↧
Comment on IDOSI Journals No Longer to be Indexed in Scopus by Joro Paveto
To mix together MDPI and SCIRP is not even funny. While some journals of MDPI are well respected (I think that Mr Beal never claimed that ALL journals of MDPI are bad), SCIRP is the king of predatory publishers without even one journal indexed in Scopus and with cases of accepted SCIgen articles.
↧
↧
Comment on IDOSI Journals No Longer to be Indexed in Scopus by Joro Paveto
Otherwise it will be a very bad practice to remove allready indexed content trying to hide the error of Scopus (to accept the journals) and it will be punishment not to the publisher but to the researchers.
Also probably after reevaluation it is not unlikely for Scopus to include the journals again (WOK did the same for the Scientific World Journal for similar reasons).
↧
Comment on Lambert Academic Publishing: A Must to Avoid by Ligia Cota Vieira
If there are that many people out there that came to academia to get rich, they are up for a very rude awakening.
I don’t think the issue with LAP is not that it doesn’t pay you… None of the other publishers will pay you either! The question is whether LAP is the best place to publish in order to get your hard work known to others, get you recognition in the scientific community, and actually be an important item in your CV? The answer will depend on the quality of your work and probably also on your particular field. If your work is solid (sometimes, even if it isn’t but let’s not go there) and there are peer-reviewed journals in your field, the answer will be: probably not.
Yes, a panel of experts evaluated your dissertation but you can’t really say they were unbiased! One of the those experts is your advisor (your success reflect on him/her), the others are probably other professors from the same institution (again, your success as an alumnus/alumna reflects on the institution) and one will be from another institution but will be connected professionally to your advisor in some way. They are also evaluating the overall work. Some portions of it often are not really “publishing quality”.
The peer-review by a publication is a validation of the work by experts that do not have an invested interest (this meaning: not your graduate committee!) on having it published or not. Your advisor (almost for sure) and sometimes other elements of the graduate committee (if they made a significant contribution for the work) are usually co-authors in these publications, I would certainly say they have invested interest in getting a publication with their name out.
They had a little less than ethical approach with me. But regardless of that, what I’m trying to say is that LAP should be a last resource. Be realist but don’t sell yourself short. For those in biology this would mean: it is more than likely your dissertation can’t land you a article in Nature, but it is quite possible you can get it in a reputable or even the top journal in your field.
I just think it is a shame that a lot of very good work is being somewhat lost like that. How many of your peers will actually read your LAP publication. In general one should try to publish on the same places it got the references from. Most of my references are from peer-reviewed journals, if most of your references are from LAP publications then go for it.
↧
Comment on List of Predatory Publishers 2014 by pr singh
our journals was indexed by chemical abstract,index corpenicus, why you say like that kindly clarify
↧
Comment on Appeals by LAOcampo
Science Publishing Group is still on the list.
↧
↧
Comment on New Low-Quality OA Publisher: Imprints Open Access by David Sullivan
The phone number traces to Chicago.
642 W Henderson St
Chicago, IL 60657,
perhaps?
↧
Comment on List of Predatory Publishers 2014 by Niloofar
Dear Mr. Beal,
Thank gou very much for providing us with useful information. The problem is that I needed a journal which gives quick response and I could not wait for a long time. I sent my paper to international journal of English language and translation studies. It is accepted. I don’t know what to do now. I couldn’t find a good journal which gives an early response. How about Asian EFL journal? Is it good or better than IJ-ELTS? Thank you in advance for your consideration.
↧
Comment on List of Predatory Publishers 2014 by Kathleen Wynd
Reblogged this on <a href="http://bibliowynd.wordpress.com/2014/05/16/list-of-predatory-publishers-2014/" rel="nofollow">Ressources électroniques des bibliothèques de l'UQAM</a> and commented:
Bonjour,
Voici une liste bien intéressante...la liste des éditeurs Open Access au comportement prédateur. Beall inclut même les critères permettant de déterminer si un éditeur ou un périodique est prédateur. Bonne lecture !
↧
Comment on Criteria for Determining Predatory Open-Access Publishers (2nd edition) by Tomas Kažemėkas
The Journal of Current Trends in Big Data Analytics
http://jctbda.ijkie.org/index.html and The International Journal of Knowledge, Innovation and Entreprenurship http://www.ijkie.org/ meet the criteria listed. They have the same editors, domains are registred by proxy, etc. They also promote a fake Big Data Summit conference in Riga, KIE 2014, http://www.kiecon.org/index.html, using artificial identities and images scraped from the internet.
↧
↧
Comment on Appeals by checking
Dear Jeffrey,
what about “Research Journal of Recent Sciences”. the journal must be in this list because the quality of their papers are so worst and they will accept all the papers just for getting money.
↧
Comment on New Low-Quality OA Publisher: Imprints Open Access by alison chan
To Email Us
contact@imrintsonline.org
contact@imrintsgroup.com
feedback@imrintsonline.org
Wow, they can’t even spell their own name right.
↧
Comment on List of Predatory Publishers 2014 by Jeffrey Beall
I don’t know which are the most and least respected journals in fields outside my own. Quick acceptance and high quality usually don’t go together in scholarly publishing.
↧
Comment on Research by Jeffrey Beall
I have this publisher listed under its full name: International Organization of Scientific Research.
↧
↧
Comment on New Low-Quality OA Publisher: Imprints Open Access by Jeffrey Beall
Good catch! I totally missed that. Thank you.
↧
Comment on New Low-Quality OA Publisher: Imprints Open Access by bill
Not uncommon, though.
I notice that IJEIT’s editor-in-chief seems to have problems spelling his address:
http://www.ijeit.com/page.php?link_id=3
↧
Comment on Appeals by Jeffrey Beall
Well, this journal is published by the <strong>International Science Congress Association</strong>. I do have this publisher on my list. This journal is not recommended.
↧
More Pages to Explore .....
