Be diplomatic. For example, begin by assuming that everything was done in good faith.
Comment on More Pseudo-Science from Swiss / Chinese Publisher MDPI by wkdawson
↧
↧
Comment on Questionable Subscription Publisher Acts Like a Predatory OA One by ML
Thanks for your help! I received the same mail and a second requiring a review for the journal.
↧
Comment on Spam Email from Questionable Journal Provides Comic Relief by lisaamartin
I work as a freelance copyeditor for Longdom. They’re good guys, promise, just new and small.
↧
Comment on List of Predatory Publishers 2014 by Jeffrey Beall
I think it’s very low quality. I would recommend that you find a better computer science journal than this one. It’s based in Asia but uses the address of a house in California as its headquarters, among other deception.
↧
Comment on Open Access Journal Provides One-Day Peer Review by Nwokonkwo D.C
I appreciate the work you are doing; making authors aware of those who are bent on destroying the academic world because of greed. I once sent.an article to asian academic research associates, my article was accepted for publication with all the errors. Again how can one check a journals ranking knowing fully well that those lof us in the third world only have obsolete equipment that those in developed world had used thirty or fifty years back.
↧
↧
Comment on Open Access Journal Provides One-Day Peer Review by Neuroskeptic (@Neuro_Skeptic)
Good catch. Here’s a definition of ‘plagiarism’: it means ‘AJPST’
↧
Comment on Bogus Journal Accepts Profanity-Laced Anti-Spam Paper by On NASA’s recent sea level claim: “Science Isn’t Broken” (Except when it is) | Watts Up With That?
[…] that the International Journal of Advanced Computer Technology recently accepted for publication a paper titled “Get Me Off Your (Fracking) Mailing List,” whose text was nothing more than those seven words, repeated over and over for 10 pages. Two other […]
↧
Comment on More Pseudo-Science from Swiss / Chinese Publisher MDPI by anon
re: the clear case of data falsification
If you’re talking about the gif Oswald H. posted about the rainwater vs. leachate data — I agree, it’s pretty damning. You can’t blame MDPI for not catching it, though, since they’re not the ones that published it. The telltale figure is from a different Herndon publication
↧
Comment on Open Access Journal Provides One-Day Peer Review by Eric
Got Invitation to be a member of Editorial Board from a new publisher. How is your idea about this journal, Dr Jeff? The email attached:
Dear Dr. xxxx,
Exploratory Research and Hypothesis in Pharmacology (ERHP) publishes original exploratory research articles and state-of-the-art reviews that focus on novel findings and the most recent advances that support new hypotheses in pharmacology. ERHP covers topics on drug research, development and applications. The exploratory research published in ERHP may not necessarily be comprehensive and conclusive, but the study design must be solid, the methodologies must be reliable, the results must be true, and the hypothesis must be conceivable and justifiable based on evidence. The journal will be launched in 2015. For more information about ERHP, please visithttp://www.xiahepublishing.com/a/Journals/20140124/17.html .
Based on your significant contributions to the field of pharmacology and medicine, I am honored to invite you to join our editorial team as a member of Editorial Board. The duties are briefly described below:
1. Review manuscripts when invited;
2. Actively recruit and/or contribute manuscripts;
3. Advise on the journals development.
Your privileges if you become an editorial member include:
1. Access to the most recent research in medicine
2. Priority to publish your manuscripts in journals from Xia & He Publishing Ltd.
3. Permanent waiver of publication charges in journals from Xia & He Publishing Ltd.
4. Opportunity to highlight recent publications from any Xia & He Publishing Ltd on the publisher’s website
If you accept my invitation, please choose your preferred role, complete the attached file, and send it with your recent CV with a list of your publications to me by email at your earliest convenience.
Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions about the journal and the roles. I look forward to the opportunity to work with you.
With kind regards,
Editor Office
Exploratory Research and Hypothesis in Pharmacology
Email: ERHP@xhpublishing.com
↧
↧
Comment on Open Access Journal Provides One-Day Peer Review by Jeffrey Beall
I’ve analyzed this publisher with help from a colleague. I found it to be borderline and therefore did not add it to my list. I will monitor it, so I appreciate this reminder. It clearly is not a strong start. I would not want my grandmother to publish here.
↧
Comment on List of Predatory Publishers 2014 by naresh
AUSTIN PUBLISHING GROUP is also a bogus company. They are there to make money.
↧
Comment on More Pseudo-Science from Swiss / Chinese Publisher MDPI by Kenji
Thank you for your reply. However, are there any accurate figures which prove that MDPI has published relatively more ‘dodgy’ articles than other reputable publishers?
↧
Comment on Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2013 by Mohamed
Dear Beall
Asian Pacific Journal of Tropical Disease is listed as predatory but it is hosted by Elsevier. Does this represent a quality guarantee?
Regards
↧
↧
Comment on Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2013 by Jeffrey Beall
Clearly, no.
↧
Comment on More Pseudo-Science from Swiss / Chinese Publisher MDPI by Leo
Why did the MDPI editors not discover the data fabrication? First of all as “anon” mentioned the obviously fabricated data was not reported by MDPI at all but some other journal. Second, even for the responsible journals it’s often the reviewers, not the editor who are expected to (hopefully) go through the data to detect fabrication and sometimes they don’t find the half-obvious ones. It’s the same reason why Nature accepted those two papers from Haruko Obokata on her STAP-stem cells.
In this case MDPI faces a problem: given the damning evidence of photoshopped datapoints in another publisher’s journal Herndon might go down one way or another, but MDPI (and Nature where he published previously) can only distance themselves from Herndon if they can prove he fabricated data in their papers as well (in science we shouldn’t do guilty-by-association). If they can’t find strong evidence they can’t retract the paper, and many commentators in this forum will take this as further proof to bash MDPI.
↧
Comment on Frontiers Launches OA Library Science Journal by Leo
[There are indeed financial incentives for Special Topic editors, in the form of a discount for their own publications in Frontiers.]
I think “Brian W.” made things clear with his conference analogy. Many reputable academic conferences also offer discounts to professors who help organise, does it mean we should condemn/ban all the academic conferences as well?
↧
Comment on Open Access Journal Provides One-Day Peer Review by Weekend reads: Ghost authors proliferate; science goes to the movies; pricey grant fraud - Retraction Watch at Retraction Watch
[…] peer review in a day? No problem, says this journal (via Jeffrey […]
↧
↧
Comment on More Pseudo-Science from Swiss / Chinese Publisher MDPI by Lee Rudolph
The inclusion of Herndon’s work in arXiv devalues the entire database and the effort and resources devoted to it.
Note that most of his papers in the arXiv are categorized as “General Physics”, abbreviated phys-gen. The analogous category for mathematics papers, “General Mathematics”, is abbreviated GM; the abbreviation is usually unabbreviated as “Garbage Mathematics”. Too bad physics didn’t set up its abbreviations like mathematics did.
I am fairly sure, based on long years of experience on the newsgroup sci.math, that many more (human) resources would be expended keeping all cranks and frauds out of the arXiv than the minimal quantity need to simply wall them off in phys-gen, GM, etc. (But why astro doesn’t have an astro-gen is a mystery to me.)
↧
Comment on Frontiers Launches OA Library Science Journal by Jeffrey Beall
Who are you? Why do you make such childish arguments?
↧
Comment on Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2015 by Jeffrey Beall
It’s an extremely low-quality attempt at a scholarly journal. I recommend against submitting manuscripts to it or serving on its editorial board.
↧
More Pages to Explore .....
