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

Comment on Journal Offers Authors “Research Paper Royalty Scheme” for Getting Citations by Jeffrey Beall

$
0
0
Please see <a href="https://scholarlyoa.com/other-pages/misleading-metrics/" target="_blank">here</a>.

Comment on Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2016 by Jeffrey Beall

$
0
0
I cannot compare two journals, especially journals outside my own field. I limit my work to identifying low-quality and predatory journals. Congratulations on getting your article accepted in <em>BBA Gene Regulatory Mechanisms</em>, which is not a predatory journal.

Comment on Appeals by Jeffrey Beall

Comment on Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2016 by Jeffrey Beall

$
0
0
Yes, <em>Medico Research Chronicles</em> (Medrech) is included on my list <a href="https://scholarlyoa.com/individual-journals/" target="_blank">here</a>. I recommend you avoid it. This <em><a href="http://www.journals.elsevier.com/journal-of-clinical-virology" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Journal of Clinical Virology</a></em> is not a predatory journal and is not on my list.

Comment on Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2016 by Jeffrey Beall

$
0
0

Can you send a link? It is difficult to know for sure which journal you mean, as this phrase is very common.

Comment on Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2016 by Jeffrey Beall

$
0
0

Its publisher, Inderscience, is not on my list.
However, this is a subscription publisher. Does your library subscribe to this journal? I think very few libraries subscribe, so if you publish here, your work will be largely hidden.

Comment on Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2016 by Jeffrey Beall

$
0
0

I recommend that you do not use ResearchGate as a source of scholarly metrics information.
the publisher Scientific Research Publishing (SCIRP) is on my list, and I strongly advise you to avoid this publishers journals. Do not send any papers to them. Please find a better publisher for your work.

Comment on Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2016 by Jeffrey Beall

$
0
0
This journal is published by Scholarlink Resource Centre Limited. I have this publisher included on my list <a href="https://scholarlyoa.com/publishers/" target="_blank">here</a>. I recommend you <strong>not </strong>send any papers to this journal.

Comment on Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2016 by Jeffrey Beall

$
0
0

MDPI is not on my list at this time, but it was in the past. It’s an expensive publisher. If possible, I would recommend that you find a stronger publisher for your work.

Comment on Reviewer to Frontiers: Your Review Process is Merely for Show — I quit by Nils

Comment on Journal Offers Authors “Research Paper Royalty Scheme” for Getting Citations by Weekend reads: Bad peer reviews; crimes against science; misconduct at Oxford - Retraction Watch at Retraction Watch

$
0
0

[…] citation royalty scheme? Jeffrey Beall has the […]

Comment on Reviewer to Frontiers: Your Review Process is Merely for Show — I quit by Marco

$
0
0

ResearchGate is not a Publisher. It does not have any journals. So, of course it is not included in Beall’s list!

Comment on Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2016 by Jeffrey Beall

$
0
0

It’s not on my list. It’s not an open-access publisher.
Does your library subscribe to any of its journals? Mine does not. I think relatively few libraries subscribe.
I would suggest you find a stronger publisher, with more visible journals, for your work.

Comment on Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2016 by A S M Kamruzzaman

$
0
0

Dear Prof. Bell
One of my article published in “International Journal of Advanced Research” (2016), Volume 4, Issue 7, 487-497. Someone said-This journal is fake. Is it true? Please comment-about this Journal.

Thanks
A S M Kamruzzaman

Comment on Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2016 by Jeffrey Beall

$
0
0
In my opinion, this is a predatory journal, and all researchers should avoid it completely. I have it included on my list <a href="https://scholarlyoa.com/individual-journals/" target="_blank">here</a>.

Comment on Reviewer to Frontiers: Your Review Process is Merely for Show — I quit by Mike B

$
0
0

Researchgate is a spammer and it should be considered as such.
They gather and sell users’ profiles without their permission.
To appear “popular”, Researchgate adds articles from people who do not wish to appear in their spamming gate!
This is unethical practice. Gathering money by advertisement and on the back of users should be shameful.

Comment on Reviewer to Frontiers: Your Review Process is Merely for Show — I quit by Mike B

$
0
0

ISSN is not a prerequisite for a journal or book.
ISSN and DOI are just new means of gathering money from people, particulalry DOI (as ISSN is generally free, but indirectly money is gathered, too).

Comment on Reviewer to Frontiers: Your Review Process is Merely for Show — I quit by Klaas van Dijk

Comment on Reviewer to Frontiers: Your Review Process is Merely for Show — I quit by Jeffrey Beall

$
0
0

I wouldn’t be so cynical about standard identifiers here. As a librarian, I can tell you that standard identifiers (DOI, ISBN, ISSN, ORCID) have great value and enable high search precision a recall, enabling high-quality information retrieval. They also enable the calculation of scholarly metrics.

Comment on Reviewer to Frontiers: Your Review Process is Merely for Show — I quit by Mike B

$
0
0

What are the real values such identifiers would add to the identified materials?
I’m sure that you are well aware that many journals have been operating for decades – some of them for centuries – without any of these identifiers.
I do not see how a virtual identifier could make a manuscript or a book or a journal more valuable than others.
If you have the best identifiers possible but the content of your material is mediocre, what values identifiers would add to it? Inversly, you can have good ideas, good content, etc but without any identifier.
DOI, for example, applies annual and individual fees for papers but for nothing in return because journal publishers should keep their journals/manuscripts alive, otherwise the DOI identifiers won’t work at all!
You just throw your money by the window by assigning DOI.
For ORCID, it looks like Researchgate that has been transformed into a black market of frauds, money and ads. Nothing else worthy.
Take a look at Researchgate and you will see it by yourself: starting from the profiles’ pictures, many senior and old guys put their pictures when they were young or “teenager” while now they have 70 ans!
Many guys add whatever tables, figures, dataset, posters, etc., and they are all counted as publications. Try it yourself and upload whatever you want and it will increase your publication record substantially!
Without talking about the same paper that could be added by more than one coauthor, so it will be counted as many times as it is added by the different coauthors.
You can upload any kind of documents (picture, excel, word, etc.) and it will appear in your profile as a new publication.
You can easily have 100 publications in your profiles by uploading anything you want, whatever you want.
How, then, can you eventually trust identifiers issued from such a so-called “company”?
It is a “GarbageGate” or “SpamGate” or “FraudGate”, nothing more.

Viewing all 10802 articles
Browse latest View live




Latest Images

<script src="https://jsc.adskeeper.com/r/s/rssing.com.1596347.js" async> </script>
<script src="https://jsc.adskeeper.com/r/s/rssing.com.1596344.js" async> </script>