31 Responses to Another Strange New OA Publisher with a Strange Name

  1. 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.

  2. Marco says:

    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

  3. Nils says:

    The typesetting of the math papers really hurts the eye…

  4. 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

    • AlexH says:

      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.

    • prollo says:

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

      • 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.

    • Marco says:

      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.

      • Loudspeaker Noble says:

        It is not my paper.I have co authored only.It came with proper citation.Will check with the author for further clarifications

      • Loudspeaker Noble says:

        You can continue to dig out problems.We are not elesivier or springer to solve it at once.BTRes is a small budding journal.ISSN authority in India has given us permission to publish.We are sure the journal is publishing good quality research.we giving our authors review report from two reviewers.pls consult the authors for knowing more.We will continue to publish free.good quality research.We are sure we will be indexed in web of science in three yrs.thank you

      • Nils says:

        “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

      • Nils says:

        “You scooped me :p”

        Is this called anticipated plagiarism?

      • Marco says:

        If it is not your paper, your name should not be on it.

        You just changed one form of scientific misconduct (plagiarism) into another form of research misconduct by the Editor-in-Chief (=you) – adding your name to a paper without providing an intellectual contribution.

        So, will you retract? You can easily check my claims of plagiarism.

        I would also like an answer how a 3-page paper supposedly submitted January 12 contains two paragraphs that are cut-and-pasted from a January *13* press release.

      • Marco says:

        If anyone is interested, I have prepared a document highlighting the plagiarized sections. It would have been much quicker if I had highlighted the non-plagiarized sections, because those amounted to 2 (two !) sentences(!!). The rest is either direct copy-paste, or with very small modifications relating to hyphens, commas and spaces, from other papers (especially Pumera 2011) and press releases.

        Jeff, if of interest, send me an e-mail and I will send you the pdf.

      • Marco says:

        Thank you; at least in part the right thing to do. Now, if only you could answer the two questions about the plagiarized sections that came from sources published after the original submission (two whole paragraphs – please don’t tell me a reviewer suggested it) and after the supposed acceptance of the final manuscript (two sentences). Also, who did the plagiarism (you previously accused the first author) and if indeed the first author, what intellectual contribution did you yourself provide, considering that only two sentences were original and the rest of the differences some small textual changes?

    • MC says:

      Beall did write about you on his blog. He has correctly listed you under “Potential, possible, or probable predatory scholarly open-access journals” on the following page:
      https://scholarlyoa.com/individual-journals/

      Thanks.

      • Keith Fraser says:

        1. Go on blog about substandard and dishonest journals to promote journal featuring plagiarism, page number doctoring and fake impact statistics.
        2. ???
        3. Profit

  5. tekija says:

    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.

    • herr doktor bimler says:

      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.

    • herr doktor bimler says:

      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 “Trinity Matrices, Properties and Construction” overlaps with but is not identical to the same author’s 2011 report of his work.

      • tekija says:

        It seems you were right Dr Bimler. According to the brief reply that I got, the ArXiv author indeed had been contacted and, apparently, he thought it was a legitimate journal that he found bona fide indexed by the same title.

        Based on that information, it may thus be he confused it with this genuine Springer publication with exatly the same name: http://link.springer.com/journal/10958

        Let’s wait what Neurosceptic learns about the other paper.

  6. HS says:

    Has anyone heard of the International Invention Journals (IIJ)
    http://www.internationalinventjournals.org/ ?

    It seem fairly new, seems legitimate, but I can’t be sure.

  7. Betty Jones Journal of Mathematical Sciences paper “On the Nature of Science Education Research and Development –
    A European Didaktik Position”

    Appears identical to this document. I will email the author to check whether he agreed to publish with Betty Jones…

  8. Derek Pyne says:

    Given that Springer already publishes a “Journal of Mathematical Sciences”, I have to wonder why Springer could not go after them for trademark infringement.

  9. Pixie says:

    The attorneys whose street address Betty Jones uses have never heard of the publisher.

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

%d bloggers like this: