Can you send links to the articles?
Comment on I get complaints about Frontiers by Jeffrey Beall
↧
↧
Comment on I get complaints about Frontiers by rhelburn
It may be that they are just publishing the abstracts and titles online and thus acting as a search engine, which is nice. I went in to Frontiers in Chemistry and put in a the key word ‘solvatochromic’ which is related to my work. Up came titles and abstracts for articles in other journals, but I realize now that I cannot print the papers. Perhaps they are acting as a data base (also) just for that information. So I am wrong to say that they had republished the papers. When I searched their site for the first time I was expecting to see only papers they had published was taken aback initially.
↧
Comment on List of Predatory Publishers 2014 by Fernando Cardona
Dear Jeffrey
What do you think abour WebmedCentral,r American Journal of Biological, Chemical and Pharmaceutical Sciences (AJBCPS) and Hindawi?
thank you in advance
↧
Comment on Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2013 by Fernando Cardona
Dear Jeffrey
in the past I acted as a editor/reviewer for a predatory publisher/journal (International Journal of Genetics and Genomics/SciencePG). I realized that was predatory when I recommend reject a paper for plagiarism and they ignored me . work has text and even figures of other papers (http://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijgg.20140204.14.pdf). After that I ask to be removed from the editorial board pannel two times, but they also ignored me. Is there any way to report plagiarism and try to remove me the editorial panel?
Thank you in advance
↧
Comment on List of Predatory Publishers 2014 by Jeffrey Beall
Webmed Central and Hindawi are not on my list.
The American Journal of Biological, Chemical and Pharmaceutical Sciences (AJBCPS), while not on my list, should be avoided. It’s one of hundreds of skeletal journals recently set up by some people in the New York City area. I haven’t had time to track down all the hundreds of low-quality journals they’ve started up.
↧
↧
Comment on Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2013 by Jeffrey Beall
Science Publishing Group is a completely bogus publisher, one that almost completely ignores industry and ethical standards. If the publisher itself knows about the plagiarism and refuses to address it, then I don’t know what can be done.
They want to keep your name on the editorial board so they can use your name and affiliation to make the journal appear legitimate, so it will be difficult or impossible for you to get your name removed.
↧
Comment on Strange New OA Publisher Launches with 42 Journals by herr doktor bimler
Medknow is now owned by the Wolters-Kluwer group, so they are predatory in the accepted corporate way rather than as individual scammers. They have an incentive to avoid any glaringly obvious fraudulence.
That said, it is clear from Neuroskeptic’s observations that at least one of their journals is a vehicle for cranks seeking scientific respectability.
↧
Comment on Strange New OA Publisher Launches with 42 Journals by Nury Vittachi
People don’t say this enough, but you are a genuine hero, providing superb work that is actually making a difference around the world. As a lecturer who comes from a journalistic background, I really appreciate the work you do. On behalf of scholars everywhere, thank you
↧
Comment on List of Predatory Publishers 2014 by FF
I am a Japanese researcher. In this week, I was asked by MDPI to review a paper. This paper was not scientific and full of defects. I wondered why did the editor receive as article and send to me? The report “Chinese Publisher MDPI Added to List of Questionable Publishers” gives the reason. Thank you.
↧
↧
Comment on Criteria for Determining Predatory Open-Access Publishers (2nd edition) by Opinion: Predatory Publishing: A Case Study | Inside Indonesian Higher Education
[…] Beall has established criteria for determining predatory publishers. He has also published a list of potential, possible, or probable predatory scholarly open-access […]
↧
Comment on OMICS Publishing Launches New Brand with 53 Journal Titles by Ewan Douglas
Publishing under Open Access mode involves a publication fee of US $519.
For Subscription articles the article processing charges (APCs) are:
Pages 1-10………………… US $60 per page
Pages 11 and above……US $75 per page
Note: All the published articles are in double-columned pages.
APC includes peer-reviewing, editing, publishing, archiving and other costs associated with publication of the articles.
Individual waiver requests will be considered on a case-by-case basis and for authors from low-income countries.
Its another OA con simple as
↧
Comment on Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2015 by Alexis
Sounds like you have an axe to grind with those publishers. Be that as it may, as someone who *used to* review and publish in Elsevier, I can tell you that while they are predatory in the Capitalist sense of the word, they don’t reflect the wholesale corruption of science Beall is calling attention to. As someone who *currently* publishes and reviews in PLOS journals, I would say you are way off base in terms of PLOS being either predatory, or scientifically corrupt.
↧
Comment on Red Alert: Avens Publishing Group by Allan Felsot
Unfortunately, the discussion to this point had mostly devolved into claims of ethnic or country of origin bias. However, I would urge more focus on how one might know that a particular publisher of many “open access” journals may be more interested in profit than publishing scientific manuscripts. Actually, the scam is not difficult to spot. So, what I see in the Avens Publishing spam mail seeking my association on an editorial board (specifically the Journal of Environmental Studies) are several triggers. First, the English language skills are poor, exhibiting many of the common grammatical and syntax errors that we see among college freshmen (and disappointingly some graduate students). Seriously, if you’re claiming to be a publisher of English language journals, I would think you would at least hire someone proficient in writing to edit your spam. Second, the solicitations usually have a plea about discounts, both in publication charges and on “registration to our ‘Individual and Institutional Memberships’. Perhaps this plea is more akin to a pyramid scheme in that the more ‘editors’ you entice, the more likely you are to establish an income stream. But seriously, peer reviewing is a service, so to try to sell something to those you are asking to work for you without pay is dishonest and of questionable ethics. Third, as someone already mentioned in the forum, the appeal to one’s ego is blatant. But really, to appeal with a sentence stating your participation “is invariably accoladed with Scientific Credits” begs credulity because that is just meaningless gibberish. Fourth, and I probably ought to have started there, when your name is inversed in the greeting, and bold faced, you can tell that the spam has been sent out to many, many scientists. If you’re requested to participate as an editor or on an editorial board, you receive either a paper copy of a letter, or the latter and a letter attached in the email. The letter should have the logo imprint and be signed by a person, not an anonymous “managing editor”. You would think the publishing scammers would have caught on by now for how to at least appear more legitimate. We don’t have to be ad hominem in our disgust of these publishing scams, we should just practice our craft of being skeptics.
↧
↧
Comment on Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2015 by Lester
I was curious about something. I know Hindawi was, at one time, on your list. I’m aware that you removed that publisher a few years back after reexamining their publication process. Do you feel that journal articles during the time in which they were on your list are credible publications to cite, or at least, as credible as they are now? They seem like they have some pretty good journals.
↧
Comment on List of Predatory Publishers 2014 by fajar nurjaman
Dear Dr. Bell,
I want to know if the International Journal of Engineering & Technical Research (https://www.erpublication.org/IJETR/) is a predatory journal or not?.
Thank you.
↧
Comment on Lambert Academic Publishing: A Must to Avoid by dafnasunflower
I will definitely have to try something like that. I just thought it might have better effect, if couple of us joined and maybe, for the start, signed a “protest letter” to the LAP publication…. Is anyone in?
↧
Comment on Strange New OA Publisher Launches with 42 Journals by Miguel van Bemmelen
aiscience.org has been indeed registered through a “Domains by Proxy service” affiliated to Godaddy.com that keeps the domains owners personal information safe from the public eye. The associated IP of the server is 174.139.178.122 – 2 under which two other sites are hosted. The registration expires on April 2015.
↧
↧
Comment on List of Predatory Publishers 2014 by Jeffrey Beall
This journal is published by a company called Engineering Research Publication. I have this publisher included on my list <a href="http://scholarlyoa.com/publishers/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">here</a>.
This is a deceptive and low-quality publisher, and I recommend that researchers not submit papers to its two journals.
↧
Comment on Publisher Requires only 20% Original Content in Article Submissions by Anindita Bhadra
I received an invitation to the editorial board of one of the GSTF journals, and as usual, I checked your list of predatory journals and found GSTF on your list. However, I see that the GSTF journals are now being hosted by the GSJ platform: http://www.globalsciencejournals.com/journal/40835
Would you comment on this please?
↧
Comment on Chinese Publisher MDPI Added to List of Questionable Publishers by lorenzoiorio2014
Please, permit me to be a little surprised. Well, yours is not my field but, according to your own words, the EiC and some of the Board members of the journal you looked at would be renown scientisits in the field and…you decided not to submit just because of some negative comments here by people who, instead, you do not know, who are often anonymous and who write about different fields?? It sounds quite odd! Where is your own judgment and discernment? Incidentally, you did not say anything about the quality of the papers published there: have you checked it as well?
↧
More Pages to Explore .....
