Comments for Scholarly Open Access

Who are you? Do you have a connection to MDPI?

Also received a request to review an article for Medical Research Archive, fro Reni Koen. Glad I looked this up.

The happy team at Metabunk note that that an unacknowledged alteration has been made to the MDPI paper, removing an attribution of a statistical advisor:
https://www.metabunk.org/debunked-j-marvin-herndons-geoengineering-articles-in-current-science-india-and-ijerph.t6456/page-6#post-163869

…while an Expression of Concern has been added, bring the whole imbroglio into the purview of RetractionWatch:
https://www.metabunk.org/debunked-j-marvin-herndons-geoengineering-articles-in-current-science-india-and-ijerph.t6456/page-6#post-163878

A note has been added to the paper’s page:

“Note added by the Publisher: This paper attracts great attention and might be controversial. We are currently re-evaluating the paper, re-assessing the comments made by the three reviewers. Please take the conclusions of this paper with care until the re-evaluation is complete.”

A note (an Expression of Concern) was recently added by MDPI. This note (see below) becomes visible when one clicks on the blue button with ‘author affiliation’ ( http://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/12/8/9375 ).

[…] che il dott. Valenzi ne abbia altri da presentare, perché si è comprato la partecipazione a una "bogus conference" da Omics, il […]

Seriously, A MUST AVOID COMPANY!!!!
First they convinced you to publish your thesis with them, telling you that you will be receiving royalties payment in the future and they will market your book on various online bookstore. That’s absolute crap!!
What they actually do is converting your thesis into a “book” which do not even exists. It is only print on demand and the price is about 35 to 100 EURO which I am sure nobody will be interested to buy as it is already available online on your university library I suppose.
So they make you BUY YOUR OWN WORK!!! Yes, that’s true! They will persuade by telling you that the more copies that you gonna buy, the more the price will be reduced..etc..etc. The fact is that THEY RUN THEIR BUSINESS BY MAKING YOU PURCHASING YOUR OWN BOOK. They know that nobody will buy your book. That”s the business. One book is approx 40 EUR and you need to buy minimum 3 copies!! So they earn about 120 EUR from one author :O . Just imagine how many persons do they contact in a day!
Moreover, they have several imprints such as Scholars Press and many others! THEY ARE FOOLING US.
They made me purchase my book and it has been almost 2 years and not even a single copy of my book has been sold so far. I am not the only person who has experienced this but also many colleagues of mine. Our university is now trying to prevent students to publish with them!

I disagree that WASET is a legitimate publisher and cannot speak for ERA. Please see <a href="http://scholarlyoa.com/2014/08/28/predatory-publisher-organizes-conference-using-same-name-as-legitimate-conference/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">this blog post</a> I composed about WASET, which treats their conference organising business rather than their publishing operation, but nevertheless, the company is one that all publishers should avoid. I think some of the Australian agencies have been soft on predatory publishers, reluctant to sufficiently scrutinize anything open-access. David Publishing is a massive spammer that accepts and publishes almost everything submitted and should be avoided by all honest researchers.

Thank you. I have added this journal to my list.

I’ve seen a variation of this problem with the journal published by a small professional society — the journal got 3 years behind in its publication schedule (the 2002 issue not appearing until 2005, for example), opening the possibility that articles that appear in the latest issue (which is 3 years behind on its official cover date) were submitted 6 months ago and include up-to-fate references.

>I’ve seen a variation of this problem with the journal published by a small professional society
Yes, me too – although never by as much as 3 years.

Kudos to the people at Metabunk.

Allow me to pimp out a blogpost-length response to Dr Herndon’s oeuvre:
http://eusa-riddled.blogspot.com/2015/09/a-pig-and-poke-cat-and-bag-and-thinking.html

One of the journals from North India sent me an article for review and it was trash. I refused the review politely. After few days a spam email that was apparently written by me and said thanks for sending me the article for review. Then on the same day another email falsely from my account even sends the review back. To this the chief editor replies thanks for reviewing the article
The above two emails had gmail notification that these emails may not have been sent by the sender.

Hi there!

How it can be European when it is based in Seychelles?

Just for the record, Seychelles is in the Indian Ocean…

Unfortunately, there are so-called “serious” journals which have a similar politics. Look for example to Facies (Springer, IF around 1.4), with an issue (2013; vol. 59, is. 4) with papers “received 16 July-accepted 18 July” or “received 20 June-accepted 21 June etc.).

The paper has just been retracted. So in fact, this fiasco could help your case. Now you can tell them "I'll listen when you publish in a scientific journal <i>and</i> it stands up to scrutiny over time."

I have a question regarding the web site
http://www.iiste.org/journals/
Are those journals authentic
Best regards

Latest Images