Quantcast
Channel: Comments for Scholarly Open Access
Viewing all 10802 articles
Browse latest View live

Comment on Spam Email from Questionable Journal Provides Comic Relief by Jeffrey Beall


Comment on Spam Email from Questionable Journal Provides Comic Relief by Nasser ghaly yousif

Comment on Spam Email from Questionable Journal Provides Comic Relief by Jeffrey Beall

$
0
0
J-Gate is a mystery. It is not on that list. I think it intended to be more of a directory than a supplier of metrics. The <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_J-Gate" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Wikipedia article</a> says it is dead.

Comment on Spam Email from Questionable Journal Provides Comic Relief by ABRJ - not!

$
0
0

And I sense a small taste of French in there, too: “Researche”. IT is truly a global and international publisher! I will admit, it is one of the few jokes that gave me a stomache ache.

Comment on List of Predatory Publishers 2014 by Fernando Cardona

Comment on Spam Email from Questionable Journal Provides Comic Relief by Katrin

$
0
0

I just got a spam mail from an organization named “SciencePG” that didn’t even bother to separate my name form my co-author’s names properly. So it addressed me like this (names changed of course):
“Dear Katrin Smith; Peter Miller; John Brown,,
It’s a great honor to select out and read your article titled xx from thousand of articles. The theme of your article is very attractive. We wonder if you get any new progress of your research or do any new study in your research field.”

Yes, that’s really going to convince me.

Comment on The Scientific World Journal Will Lose Its Impact Factor — Again by Kingsley N. Ukwaja

$
0
0

Dear Beall,

After many years of following your work and visiting your site, I felt compelled to thank you for the great work you are doing and for helping the academic/scientific community.

I wish to drop a few lines about HINDAWI publisher. I believe the journals operated by this publisher are all legit. Agreed, they try to create additional journal titles almost on quarterly bases, they list the names of their journal editors (although no editor in chief) in their websites with their affiliation and recent works as indexed in scopus.

I am not sure why the TSWJ was listed as dropped in the JCR…But I have had three experiences with submitting three manuscripts in three different journals in HINDAWI publisher.

My first paper, submitted to one of their newer titles (in PubMEd, but not listed in JCR yet) was rejected. Three reviewers reviewed the work (the recommendations were minor revision, major revision, and rejection), respectively; but for unclear reasons the editor rejected the paper. I used the advice given by the reviewers to make changes and resubmitted to a journal (indexed in JCR and PubMed) with a different publisher (two recommendations were minor revisions) before the paper was accepted.

Since then, I have submitted two additional papers to two different HINDAWI-operated journals. Each was reviewed by at least two reviewers and went through two rounds of review before the papers were accepted.

Furthermore, compared to other open access publishers, I believe HINDAWI publishers appears to be the most friendly to the research community. Except for the month of October 2014, Since the beginning of this year, the publisher has had several offerings of article processing charge (APC) waivers for manuscripts submitted in some of their journals. Within the month the APC waivers were being offered, all manuscripts irrespective of country of origin submitted to the journal that were finally accepted are published free of charge.

Indeed, for my two manuscripts which were published this year (one published, the other in press) by journals operated by HINDAWI, I was not charged any APCs because I took advantage of the APC waivers offered by the journals (presently, the APCs for the journals are $600 and $800).

With my above experience, although I believe some of their titles are not yet perfect, I still think that the journal policies of HINDAWI publishers does not yet warrant inclusion in your list.

For the records, the above are just my experiences with this publisher.

Thank you once again Prof Beall.

Comment on List of Predatory Publishers 2014 by Jeffrey Beall

$
0
0

I will monitor this publisher. I don’t want to add it to my list at this time. Did you observe anything unprofessional about it?


Comment on Misleading Metrics by DC

$
0
0

The opening line of their website is a good tip off:

“…the IC Journal Master List – contains currently over 13,000 journals from all over the world, including 1200 journals form Poland”

10% are “form Poland”…although I respect work from Poland, if 10% of the world’s most respected journals come from Poland, I’ve been publishing in the wrong country

Comment on Spam Email from Questionable Journal Provides Comic Relief by SciencePG - not!

$
0
0

SciencePG is a serious spammer and will succeed, for the following reasons. Fortunately, in your case, you can see the farce. But for many thousands if not tens of thousands of scientists in developing countries clamoring for their research to be seen, this ego-enhancing e-mail, even if filled with errors, is heaven-sent. Maybe that is why I receive on average 2 such invitations a week from this organization?

Comment on The Scientific World Journal Will Lose Its Impact Factor — Again by IF - stop!

$
0
0

And while following all the pleasant advice about speaking to your advisors, may I also suggest that you contact the Pakistani higher education authorities to stop using the IF as an equivalent of quality and to assess PhDs. When wll this pathetic game and dependence on the IF stop? It has corrupted science. No longer do students talk about the quality of their work, they just want to know about the IF of the journal it is published in. Young scientists must seek a novel way to step out of this very sick state science is in. The sooner we lose the IF, the better.

Comment on List of Predatory Publishers 2014 by Y Charles

$
0
0

Dear Jeff Beall,

thank you very much for your valuable information. To find a good legitimate journal has become very difficult with high processing fees charged to authors.

Comment on Appeals by Mrs. Adekemi Olowokere

$
0
0

this is a great work. please I will like to find out why Sciedu press is included. I have submitted an article to them before. and the review process was rigorous .

Comment on Life Science Journal Delisted from Scopus by Lishan

$
0
0

Dear Guys, Beaware, Life science Journal has also been delisted from the Thomson Reutors web site

Comment on Low-Quality Scholarly Publishers Don’t Understand Copyright by Charles Oppenheim

$
0
0

Well spotted, Jeffrey! Your suggestion for why the publishers do this is plausible, too.


Comment on Real Location of JSciMed Central Revealed by Joseph D. Tariman

$
0
0

JSciMed is fake. You can’t get hold of anybody. They want your credit card number through email which is very dangerous. Who knows who else will get your credit card number.

Comment on Spam Email from Questionable Journal Provides Comic Relief by Marco

$
0
0

It may be a bit too easy to think only scientists in developing countries will fall for this. Gullible souls are everywhere; not to speak of the cynical.

Comment on Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2013 by Research Bias: What to Look for When Reading Health Articles

$
0
0

[…] Surgery University of Texas Interview with Molly Gregas, Ph.D. Behavioral and Brain Sciences Scholarly Open Access 1 Scholarly Open Access 2 Merriam-Webster New York […]

Comment on Low-Quality Scholarly Publishers Don’t Understand Copyright by wkdawson

$
0
0

Hmm, maybe this is so they can change their mind on a whim. Today it is CC, tomorrow they charge? If everything is vague, then they can say what they like.

Comment on Criteria for Determining Predatory Open-Access Publishers (2nd edition) by Arshia

Viewing all 10802 articles
Browse latest View live




Latest Images