Scholarly Journals for Winos

WYNO Academic Journals

Don’t drink this stuff

In American English, the term “wino” refers to a person who drinks a lot of wine or some other form of alcohol. Thus when I first became aware of WYNO Academic Journals, I had a good laugh.This publisher claims to be based in Lagos, Nigeria with a branch office in Allahabad, India. More predator publishers come from Nigeria and India than any other countries, I think, so this one ought to fit right in.

This publisher has eight newly-launched journal titles. For each one, there is this statement: “Authors are required to pay a $400 handling fee.” The site does not explain what the publisher’s name, WYNO, refers to.

None of the journals has any content yet, but they have thrown together some editorial boards, mostly people from India.

I recommend against serving on editorial boards and against submitting any manuscripts to this publisher.

Glass of wine

WYNO will bring on a headache.

Appendix: List of WYNO Academic Journals as of November 14, 2012

 

Wine glass photo by André Karwath via Wikimedia Commons.

20 Responses to Scholarly Journals for Winos

  1. I have no evidence to show whether this is a predatory publisher or not, and from the evidence you give (an unexplained name that you find humorous, offices in Lagos and Allahabad, ‘mostly people from India’ on editorial boards’, and no content yet from a new publisher), neither have you.

    The editorial boards also include names from: Universidad de Sevilla; Mosul University; Pennsylvania State University; Texas A & M AgriLife Research; State School of Higher Education in Chelm, Pocztowa; Texas A&M University; University Of Essex; Savannah State University; Cairo University; Weizmann Institute of Science; Tikrit University; Dammam University College; Iowa State University; Bowie State University; North Carolina Central University; Southern Illinois University Edwardsville; University of Hawaii; La Trobe University; Southern Illinois University School of Medicine; University of Verona; BIOMED Research Institute; New England Primate Research Center; Wageningen UR Food & Biobased Research; University of California; Institut de Recherche pour le Développement (IRD) Senegal.

    • The purpose of my blog post was to describe the publisher, not to justify its inclusion on my list. Also, publishers often add names to editorial boards without permission, so if you believe everything they say, I think you’re naive.

      If you are happy with this publisher, then I encourage you to submit your work to them. I am sure they would be delighted to publish it and that it would fit nicely.

      • I’m not happy with this publisher, neither am I naïve. I’m more concerned that new publishers, who may have the best intentions and may prove to be robust in the longer term if given a level playing field, might be tarnished before they have a chance to prove themselves, by opinions which are not based on much evidence. An accurate list of predatory publishers has much value. Your name is now well-known in these circles, and you have influence in matters related to such issues. What is needed is good detective work. For example, I think you assume that ‘Wyno’ is an acronym, but nowhere on the Wyno site can I see that name used in caps. So, ‘Wyno’ may be a name that has significance in another language or culture. Or it may not. Without good detective work we don’t know.

      • Roddy, thank you for the constructive criticism. I take your point. Here are the reasons I added Wyno Academic Journals to my list:

        1. The publisher is contradictory about licensing. On the one hand it claims to assign the CC BY license to published articles, yet in another place it says, “By submitting your scholarly work to any of our journals and if it is approved and published, you have automatically and permanently transferred your copyrights to Wyno Academic Journals.” I think this shows serious confusion on the part of the publisher. This is highly contradictory.

        2. The site in one place says it has five journals; in another place it claims eight journals. In other words, the website is not well maintained as the company grows.

        3. The instruction for authors page appears to be copied almost word-for-word from another publisher. Also, I suspect that the photographs used on the website are stolen from from other websites without permission or licensing.

        4. The conference announcements page only lists one conference, with no link, and it doesn’t say where it will be held.

        5. The other conference page is “under construction.” This may indicate that the whole site was thrown together quickly.

        6. The publisher states that a Dr. Victor Obaigbena is its “editor in chief,” yet a Google Scholar search on his name turns up nothing. (His Facebook page says he only has a bachelors degree).

        7. I did research the name prior to making fun of it. I found nothing. (I originally assumed that it was the name of a Nigerian state). There’s another publisher from Nigeria called Wudpecker Journals; given the intense competition among predatory journals, having a funny name is one way to stand out. I believe that is the intention here.

        Thanks,

        Jeffrey

  2. Guido says:

    I don’t mean to be rude, but what’s the point of merely describing a random publisher? It seems to me that your intention is to ‘name and shame’ it as a predatory publisher, but if you do so without providing arguments this is not very helpful. You generally did provide arguments in your other posts (fake editorial boards, fake addresses…), so I guess you had similar arguments here? As a general point, I agree with the sentiment uttered by others that while you do good work with your blog, it is important to distinguish between ‘predatory’ publishers and inexperienced start-ups from developing countries.

  3. Yikmis Meral says:

    In the below web page

    http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1002/(ISSN)2045-8827

    you will see “MicrobiologyOpen is supported by other journals published by Wiley, including a number of society owned journals. The journals listed below support MicrobiologyOpen and participate in the Manuscript Transfer Program by referring articles of suitable quality and offering authors the option to have their paper, with any peer review reports, automatically transferred to MicrobiologyOpen.”

    Why do they transfer to MicrobiologyOpen from high impact journals? What is the hidden motive for the Manuscript Transfer Program? Do you have courage to write your view on WileyOpen?

    • Yikmis, There is nothing wrong with Wiley’s manuscript transfer program. I know of at least one other OA publisher that has a similar program. For article submissions that get rejected from journals with a very low acceptance rate, the publisher offers to publish the article in a good but lower impact journal, forwarding the peer reviews to the new journal. This is good for both the authors and the publisher. I think you need to re-read their documentation. It’s a promising program, a successful experiment, I think. Why do you see it as problematic? What’s the real source of your anger? What publisher are you associated with?

  4. Yikmi Smeral says:

    Earlier when these high impact journals reject, the articles were going to PloS One. After the success of PloS One, all the big publishers start this manuscript transfer program. I see that Manuscript Transfer Program is meant for earning additional money. They do not want to send the rejected manuscripts to other publishers like PloS one. They just want to utilize themselves. When I submitted an article to Nature, my article was transferred to their Scientific Reports journal after rejection by Nature.

    • You could have withdrawn your article after it was first rejected.
      Of course the publishers are going to try to compete with other publishers.

      • Yikmi Smeral says:

        Why doesn’t Wiley send the articles rejected by its high impact journals to their own low impact subscription journals? Why this manuscript program is for transferring only to its own Open Access journal? Do you think Wiley’s all traditional journals are high impact journals and its Open Access journals are low impact journals?

      • I think you should direct your questions about Wiley to Wiley itself.

  5. diehappy07 says:

    Following comment was posted in another blog post, but there were no replies so I am posting it again here.

    “If a new publishers starts new journals, then how is the publisher supposed to advertise about his journals in ethically correct manner/ without spamming, so that other readers/researchers will come to know about the journals?”

    I apologize for the repetition.

    • Spamming is illegal in many countries and violates the terms of use of many Internet service providers.

      I think a good way to promote a new journal is through exhibits and presentations at scholarly conferences, through word-of-mouth, advertising in journals, websites, etc.

    • Nils says:

      I agree with Jeffrey Beall’s reply. In addition, I believe that there are already so many journals (at least in my area of expertise) that one should have very good reasons to create a new one.

      A good example of a success story, in which a journal managed to establish itself by word-of-mouth advertisement, is
      the case of Markov Processes and Related Fields. See Vadim Malyshev’e editorial in a recent anniversary issue at

      http://mech.math.msu.su/~malyshev/abs10.htm

  6. Lost in Translation says:

    One think lost in the comments above is the $400 handling fee. I don’t know of any reputable journals that charge such a fee. Now, if that is the wave of the future, then I stand back and laissez le bon temps roullette.

  7. Sandy De Groote says:

    Jeffrey Beall says spamming is illegal in many countries which is true. In his earlier blogs, he was commenting on Hindawi for spamming. Why he has not included Hindawi in his new list? What is predatory publisher then? Does it mean that Hindawi has stopped spamming? I still get spam emails from Hindawi. Some of you also would be still receiving spam solicitation emails from Hindawi.

  8. Thankyou for the response to my Comment, Jeffrey. You may find http://www.sciencemag.org/content/338/6110/1018.summary of interest (I don’t have a sub to the full text)

  9. tjanos says:

    A legit alternative of spamming researchers may be to send the CfP/Introduction/Announcments to scholarly mailing lists.

  10. [...] The oddly named Wyno academic journals, many of which seem not to exist (or at least were not easily evident on the publisher’s web site) are not universally admired. [...]

  11. Noëlle Lidvan says:

    Thanks to Jeffrey for his important work ! I recently received spam from Wyno, and I was really surprised to see that the editorial board includes no Professor, and no name you can really consider as a well-known specialist in a specific domain. Moreover, when you track the CV and publications of these people, you can’t find convincing informations.
    Just look at the differences with Frontiers (I dont’ claim that Frontiers is the best Open Access Journal, but it’s a good basis for comparison).
    I’m not saying that new publishers cannot develop, but that clear methods can be used for that. And these methods are quite simple, and well known by any member of the scientific community : relying on academic networks to advertize, transmitting information directly to universities and research centers, etc.

Leave a Reply -- All comments are subject to moderation, including removal.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,103 other followers

%d bloggers like this: