Talk:Emerging Sources Citation Index

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Academic Journals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Academic Journals on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Academic JournalsWikipedia:WikiProject Academic JournalsTemplate:WikiProject Academic JournalsAcademic Journal articles
See WikiProject Academic Journals' writing guide for tips on how to improve this article.

Reference works (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Reference works, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Reference worksWikipedia:WikiProject Reference worksTemplate:WikiProject Reference worksReference works articles

Predatory Journals[edit]

Is this strictly true? As someone who works in the industry, it's not actually easy to get in at all, and I can't believe any dodgy journals get in. It's as selective as the main index - other than it obviously includes only new journals Cjmooney9 (talk) 17:17, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reply*

All the journal indexes including Web of Science have been shown to have predatory journals. In the case of Web of Science, these were the Frontiers of ... journals - see this Wiki page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frontiers_Media The phrasing is critical here - "Frontiers Media was, controversially, included in Jeffrey Beall's list of potential predatory open access publishers"

Note that the author is same as the one for the ESCI. The journals from Frontiers Media are usually in the Web of Science.

Now the important question besides whether a publisher has predatory practices, is what is the threshold (Jeffrey Beall's list no longer exists because his threshold for predatory journals was too low and he was sued)? And for me it is very important to consider - are the predatory journals removed once they have been found out?

In the case of the Iranian joural mentioned in the context of "Bogus Iran-Based Journal Allows Up to 40% Plagiarism", it was removed from the ESCI, whereas the Frontiers Media journals are still in Web of Science.

To RandyKitty (the most frequent editor for the journal entries): When predatory journals are removed from the ESCI list, when should the phrase "it contains many predatory journals" which is present tense become past tense "it had contained predatory journals in the past" Qtian~enwiki (talk) 14:33, 27 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

When we have a reliable source that is independent of Clarivate Analytics that says this. Anything else would be prohibited original research. BTW, please note that the Web of Science itself is not a database. It ia an access platform providing access to several databases (depeniding on the subscription). ESCI is accessed through WoS, for example. --Randykitty (talk) 14:36, 27 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

With all due respect, but what does Jeffrey Beall know about ESCI criteria? You guys really go overboard with this. ESCI, SCI, SSCI, EI, etc. are the only quality indicators in the publishing industry. I would like to request to remove this sentence, unless, other sources but Beall, mention this. Kenji1987 (talk) 21:19, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I do think that Wiki editors in general do not really understand the concept of validity of sources. Beall's blog is considered to be a reliable source, but that does not necessarily mean that everything that is mentioned there is correct. I don't see any real predatory publisher being indexed in ESCI, and I strongly question whether Beall really knows how ESCI works. Kenji1987 (talk) 08:09, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I changed it to Jeffrey Beall argued that... for the reason that only Beall thinks that ESCI is easier for predatory journals to get into. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.14.46.15 (talk) 09:17, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]