Comments for Scholarly Open Access

Hi Mr Jeffrey,
I want to ask you about a journal named : journal of new sciences, if it is a predatory journal or not.
http://www.jnsciences.org/
Thank you Sir for your fast answer and for your immense help to young researchers

Well, on the subject…then Bob, Carol, Ted, and Alice is just as cute. They must have read the manual on marketing. Surely, Jeff, you can swim in the number of faux journals out there.

Not sure where to put this, and perhaps you already know this, but here is a relevant story about one of those fake impact factor companies:
http://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news/how-the-citizen-became-a-science-journal

The typesetting of the math papers really hurts the eye…

Hi Beall
Why you are everytime writing blogs on fake journals ? Please write about startup good journal like our Biotechnological Research ( http://www.biotechnologicalresearch-journal.com/ ) .It will be encouraging for us
Thank you

Hmm, e.g.

http://bettyjonespub.com/3JMS20150221-1.pdf

was published in 2012 here

http://arxiv.org/abs/1207.6205

I do not think the author knows this, however, so emailed him.

Why is the first issue’s page numbers start with 101 instead of 1? http://www.biotechnologicalresearch-journal.com/current-issue-1.html

With this numbering and by looking at the bibliographic data of each article, one can logically assume that it was published in a journal with over a hundred pages of content -content which in fact does not exist. Some readers may find this technique questionable or worst; a misleading trick.

On the start page of your journal there are some fake citation indices referenced… this is kind of questonable practice, isn’t it?

AlexH
Thanks for the suggestion..started like that..Will solve the problem next volume onwards.Thanks a lot :)

May be..We had applied for Index Coprenicus and DOAJ Indexing .It will take some time.I think it is better to index somewhere until we are included in standard indexing platforms.

My university has an institutional repository and one of my articles (four years old) showed up on it Wednesday. Today I received an email from Lambert wanting to publish it. Give them credit for speed, at least. (No, I am not going to reply to them.)

Dear beall,
Please assist to include list of acceptable journals

Plagiarism by the Editor-in-Chief is never a good way to start a journal. Since I assume you are the Noble K Kurian on that paper, I suggest you retract your paper ASAP, and make sure you do it the proper way, with clear indication as to why and which sources were plagiarized, and includes reporting yourself to your department chair and/or your PhD supervisor for scientific misconduct. Otherwise I’ll gladly do so on your behalf.

For example, Martin Pumera and Liangzhu Feng will not be too happy to see so much straight copy-paste (with a few minor modifications) from their articles in Materials Today and Nanomedicine, respectively (people may do some googling using the abstract and the first two paragraphs of the introduction).

There is also direct copying from various other sources. For example, the glucose sensor example can be found word-for-word on Wikipedia (but also elsewhere, so its origin is not so clear). The stuff about the UPenn engineers is directly copied from a January 13 press release (which is intriguing, since the paper’s information indicates a January 12 submission date, so either this was added at the revision stage, and this would be a LOT of text added, or these dates are just made up). Interested people can check here:
http://www.upenn.edu/pennnews/news/penn-engineers-develop-graphene-based-biosensor-works-three-ways-once

Also directly copied is part of this press release:
http://spectrum.ieee.org/nanoclast/biomedical/diagnostics/graphene-biosensor-is-faster-and-more-sensitive-than-elisa?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+IeeeSpectrumFullText+%28IEEE+Spectrum+Full+Text%29

Interested readers will also note that the references do not go to the places from which so much text was copied.

As noted, if the Editor-in-Chief of a journal is already so poorly educated in proper scientific conduct, the journal is bound to become yet another repository of plagiarized work and nonsense science.

Check the list here:
http://scholarlyoa.com/publishers/
It’s listed

I cannot help notice that the Betty Jones version was “published” with a sticky note from “Administrator” on the PDF, highlighting a formula and inviting someone unknown (the contributor? The reader?) to insert the correct version.

The Betty Jones version is not identical to the ArXived version; paragraphs are rearranged. I would not be surprised if the publishers troll through ArXiv looking for authors to spam with invitations to publish their work in a "real journal". Similarly, the paper <a href="http://www.bettyjonespub.com/1JMS20150125-1.pdf" rel="nofollow">"Trinity Matrices, Properties and Construction"</a> overlaps with but is not identical to the same author's <a href="https://aimsciences.org/journals/pdfs.jsp?paperID=6981&mode=full" rel="nofollow">2011 report of his work</a>.

[…] betrügerische Zeitschriften, die für Geld alles veröffentlichen – sie zeigen im Film sogar kurz Bealls Liste der unseriösen Verlage. Es ist natürlich klar, weshalb sie so vorgehen: Gutachten kosten Zeit. Es hätte eine ganze Weile […]

“It is not my paper.I have co authored only”

Every person cosigning a paper should take full responsibility for its contents. Blaming problems such as plagiarism on a co-author is not an ethical option.

Hey! I was about to say that! You scooped me :p

“You scooped me :p”

Is this called anticipated plagiarism?

Latest Images