712:
111:
131:
1255:
183:
91:
121:
37:
141:
101:
151:
1585:
To begin with, cut out that "search" which misleadingly lists every journal known to man. The best part is the list of redlinked sources - but as there are an infinite number of possible redlinks to add, that does not help. I suspect that the separated "actual real
Knowledge (XXG) problem sources"
1724:
listed as "hijacked"? Item number 30 on the very first page of your list? Did you read Beall's comments which made clear that "Tec Review" was his problem and not "MIT Technology Review"? That would be reassuring as it would then be clear that evil forces are corrupting my downloads. Meanwhile, it
945:
is a good starting point to find unreliable sources, at least those which make use of citation templates. Once they are found, the community can then critically evaluate whether or not they should be cited, leading to a better, more reliable, Knowledge (XXG). Whether a source should be cited can be
2360:
The list is a tool, and like any other tool it can be abused if you really want to. But you'd have to ignore the bigass disclaimer the top of the list, saying that the SourceWatch is only a starting point, that it's not perfect, that it doesn't know the full context in which a source is used, and
2099:
is a neutral noticeboard, and I stated the issue clearly. It is not "CANVASSING" buy a mile or two. The article has exceedingly few viewers, and you "pinged" friends to go there, while I "pinged" no one at all. Period. I rather think that when a reliable source uses a word, we should not assign it
1560:
It is on the list in the very first column one arrives at through the only "search" box provided! - and even casual users would notice it, as most of the "bad sites" are also in that second column. This from the "search" function on the "Sourcewatch" redirected page. As are all the other NY
1011:
703:
633:
876:
is something that should be usable by the community at large. While there likely is still room for improvements and debates on what should or should not be listed, one no longer needs to be familiar with the intricate workings of the bot to make sense of
30:
The
Knowledge (XXG) SourceWatch is a new project designed to find unreliable sources cited by Knowledge (XXG). The SourceWatch's creator presents a brief history of the project, along with its motivations, and what exactly it means to be listed on The
683:
is necessarily inappropriate – the newspaper did not exclusively publish Nazi propaganda over the 84 years of its existence – but it is good to verify that we are not citing Nazi propaganda inappropriately. This can be found either by browsing
1586:
list will be much more manageable. Oh, and blacklisting every "wrong science source" may be nice to some, but deleterious to many articles. Meanwhile, is there a reason to keep publishers on the whist which Beall had deleted from that list?
871:
during development, but it was only known to a handful of people due to its unpolished state. The compilation was at times plagued with a staggering number of false positives and poor presentation structure. Now, after several iterations,
1582:
457:
2129:. But that's rather irrelevant to this Signpost piece, so can we please keep debate about what to do with the article on the article's talk page, rather than have a meta debate about how to have a debate on a half a dozen page?
365:
2351:) and aren't used to back up completely wild OR/POV claims. Likely all this list will be doing is accelerate the rate at which those discussions occur, since it makes finding these potential problematic citations easier.
1214:
2322:
My gut feeling is that this is as 'gameable' as any of the original sources themselves. Debate about whether something on Beall's list is reliable has occurred countless of times. The answer with Beall is usually
1893:
Hijacked journals are legitimate academic journals with imposters pretending to be the legitimate publication. These citations are likely not problematic, but it is good to check that the real journal is being
2303:
Given the above assumption, is there any way that this list of questionable sources be gamed in such a way that it can be weaponized in the ongoing bare-knuckle, no-rules brawl between Team Blue and Team Red?
896:
If you can get your work published in respectable scientific journals – that is to say, if you can produce evidence through replicable scientific experiments, then
Knowledge (XXG) will cover it appropriately.
652:
potentially unreliable citation is cited. This is useful when you edit an article and want to make sure you are not citing bad sources. However, this method only works if 5 or fewer articles cite a specific
1304:
1329:
1319:
1314:
1294:
239:
977:
could draw from, like lists of journals lying about being indexed by reputable databases. Other efforts to identify and prevent unreliable sourcing can be found in the "other efforts" section of the
1299:
1279:
1324:
284:
211:
1354:
1349:
1309:
1284:
336:
323:
310:
252:
77:
1658:
1380:
1289:
2189:, as has been requested of you over a dozen times now, where a discussion of the actual issue can happen, rather than these silly meta debates about how to have a debate about something.
1272:
419:{{cite journal |last1=Yager |first1=K. |year=2006 |title=Wiki ware could harness the Internet for science |journal=Nature |volume=440 |issue=7082 |pages=278–278 |doi=10.1038/440278a}}
2400:
2157:
You hatted and rehatted my post which I believed and still believe set forth the issue. That you assert it was not "neutral" and not placed in a "neutral" place is not of import as
487:
that a journal is indexed in DOAJ even if its web site carries the DOAJ logo or says that it is indexed ". This is good advice, which applies equally to the other indexing services.
1266:
1241:
198:
56:
45:
732:
847:
may be my ideas, but JLaTondre is the one responsible for the heavy lifting and making them a reality since 2011. I must also acknowledge the contributions of several people:
1334:
789:, which are fraudulent publications designed to have identical or similar names to established publications. Other false positives can include members of categories such as
1339:
297:
2177:
Again, I did not ping three friends. I pinged the original author of the words, and the two people that posted on the talk page before. Neutrally. You on the other hand,
435:. The compilation is organized in many ways (alphabetically, by citation count, and so on) and is typically updated a few days after the 1st and 20th of each month, when
1191:
1094:
be a citation to one of the fraudulent websites, even though in all likelihood those citations will be to the real website. This behaviour may change in the future.
2451:
2298:
Assume for a moment that for ideological reasons a fairly large number of
Knowledge (XXG) editors dislike some reliable sources and like other, unreliable sources.
2030:
840:
is heavily based on third party lists and will to an extent reflect the opinion of those lists' compilers, which could be inaccurate or outdated in certain cases.
1827:
is the hijacker. The Beall website gets the terminology wrong. Also I've tweaked the search box to only search in the SourceWatch when on a /Questionable page.
1215:"Jimmy Wales, Founder of Knowledge (XXG): Create and enforce new policies that allow for true scientific discourse about holistic approaches to healing. : -->
21:
843:
I want to emphasize here just how much work JLaTondre has done on this and JCW over the nearly 10 years of the compilation. The original JCW compilation and
2427:
1459:
I second this, and I'd like to thank everyone involved for stepping up to make
Knowledge (XXG) a more reliable and trustworthy resource for our readers. —
621:
directly. If 5 or fewer articles cite a specific publication, the links to these articles will be given. If more than 5 articles cite it, you will have to
1797:
One column (the left one in his list) is the fakes, the second column (the right one is clearly labeled "authentic journal") is the "authentic journal"
625:
to find where it is cited. This is useful to find articles which need to be updated with reliable sources, or where unreliable sources need to be removed.
2422:
2417:
1044:
Maddox, J.; Randi, J.; Stewart, W. W. (1988). "'High-dilution' experiments a delusion". ''Nature''. '''334''' (6180): 287–290. {{doi|10.1038/334287a0}}.
360:
2104:. Maybe I am in a minority, in Carrollian way. That should end the contretemps as I have done my best to state facts and not hat the helk of someone.
94:
2412:
2066:
is to discuss whether or not sources are reliable. It is not the place to debate their interpretation, or decide on what terminology is clearest.
801:
them. Yet another cause of false positives is that the algorithm used to find those unreliable sources is not perfect. It is designed to find
492:
The idea of using the JCW compilation to fight unreliable sourcing stewed in my mind for a while, until I finally decided to take action in
1442:
Thank you for fighting the good fight. Efforts like this are why the credibility of
Knowledge (XXG) is increasing. Keep up the good work.
1941:
which admits Butler (a main source" was "misused - but doubled down on the misuse? Sorry, I was giving you the benefit of the doubt --
1666:
1729:. I am glad you pointed out that many organizations are given deprecatory descriptions, by the way. It makes one feel reassured that
1491:
in its talons. Bot-generated lists are not something I recommend for use as the number of "false positives" is beyond belief. Argh.
2407:
2249:
1254:
571:
464:
396:
50:
36:
17:
2347:
check, but would be often be considered perfectly valid sources for basic claims that aren't at the cutting edge of research (e.g.
519:
2161:. Or possibly actually feel it was a reasonable post on the proper noticeboard, and less CANVASS that "pinging" three friends.
900:
409:
2371:
2271:
2199:
2139:
2076:
1969:
1905:
1837:
1765:
1696:
1643:
1534:
1420:
1639:
1129:
695:
591:
436:
1199:
906:
790:
2259:
970:
892:
567:
468:
547:
1581:". Page N18 of the sources list. I fear the "search box" missed your editorial review I had suggested a while back?
690:
663:
595:
493:
1083:
1857:
As noted, Beall only lists the fake one as the "hijacked journal" and the "real one" is listed as "authentic."
2433:
676:
672:
2384:
2313:
2284:
2253:
2212:
2170:
2152:
2113:
2089:
2045:
1982:
1954:
1918:
1878:
1850:
1809:
1778:
1742:
1709:
1634:
1595:
1547:
1500:
1476:
1454:
1433:
1137:
833:
685:
618:
375:
1449:
1406:
2051:
938:
559:
711:
414:
templates found in articles, and compiles them into various lists. For example, in the following citation
1169:
abbreviations of such journals. It also puts appropriate disambiguation notes in articles, when relevant.
2245:
2186:
1815:
1791:
1717:
1674:
1562:
629:
579:
1823:(a legitimate academic journal for which a bogus website has been created by a malicious third party),
551:
285:
Knowledge (XXG) predicts flu more accurately than Google; 43% of academics have edited
Knowledge (XXG)
2033:
which seems not to relate to the problems at hand - specifically making "interpretations of sources"
1469:
773:
to researchers, but which nonetheless remain committed to scientific and academic standards. For the
2126:
2026:
1959:
See the note on the talk page. And no one cares about a talk page message posted by a bot ages ago.
1616:
583:
2309:
668:
599:
2379:
2279:
2207:
2147:
2084:
1977:
1913:
1845:
1773:
1704:
1542:
1428:
740:
rigorous data on why Mazières and Kohler should be taken off from the aforementioned mailing list.
526:
is not perfect by any means, especially if you want a list that only identifies journals that are
432:
2367:
2267:
2195:
2135:
2072:
1965:
1901:
1833:
1761:
1692:
1611:
1530:
1514:
1488:
1445:
1416:
1059:
472:
2344:
2185:, presenting your side, rather than neutrally advertise the ongoing discussion. Now, take it to
324:
Wikimedia
Foundation endorses open-access petition to the White House; pending changes RfC ends
104:
2339:, which isn't the greatest, but it's not zero worth'. Facts backed up by those journals would
2178:
2166:
2109:
2041:
1950:
1874:
1805:
1738:
1662:
1591:
1574:
1496:
1376:
1154:
1108:
778:
723:
444:
124:
2375:
2275:
2203:
2143:
2080:
2022:
1973:
1909:
1841:
1769:
1730:
1700:
1538:
1424:
955:
745:
Of course, due to the inherently subjective nature of what constitutes an unreliable source,
704:
Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject
Academic Journals/Journals cited by Knowledge (XXG)/Questionable1
634:
Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject
Academic Journals/Journals cited by Knowledge (XXG)/Questionable1
2361:
tells you that you shouldn't go on a mass purge without discussing things at the RSN first.
2236:
1888:
1820:
1748:
1654:
1570:
1405:
A previous discussion about a technical error related to the publishing script was moved to
1079:
914:
786:
392:
2182:
2118:
2096:
2063:
1733:
is adhered to in all projects. And the reason for "redlinked journals" in profusion is?
1621:
1520:
978:
951:
947:
860:
736:. The journal's 'review' process deemed the paper "excellent". Figure 2 in the paper shows
563:
440:
370:
134:
2059:
1462:
959:
658:
369:(JCW) compilation, I realized we could harness the power of bots to identify a variety of
930:
719:
154:
2305:
1679:
1518:
is not on the SourceWatch anywhere (if I'm wrong, please point where). It is listed on
1150:
1121:
1104:
864:
852:
848:
758:
497:
480:
448:
2159:
it is still hatted and anyone can read it for themselves to see how non-neutral it was
2445:
2363:
2263:
2191:
2131:
2068:
1961:
1897:
1829:
1757:
1688:
1526:
1412:
515:
510:
471:
about being included in DOAJ to appear more legitimate. Predatory journals will also
164:
2162:
2105:
2037:
1946:
1870:
1863:
The person who writes the first list is the one who gets to choose his terminology.
1801:
1734:
1602:
1587:
1583:
Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Academic Journals/Journals cited by Knowledge (XXG)/N18
1507:
1492:
727:
587:
439:
are generated. Those who want a bit of history and technical details can check the
144:
836:, and the compilation will be updated accordingly in future bot runs. And lastly,
555:
212:
Top scholarly citers, lack of open access references, predicting editor departures
816:), but will sometimes pick up journals that are obviously (to humans) unrelated (
1125:
882:
622:
424:
114:
1945:. Add all the sites you wish as I seem to have a very bad taste in my mouth.
1219:
575:
384:
648:
potentially unreliable publication is cited, but it will let you know that
1943:
but misusing sources and doubling down on that misuse is not my cup of tea
667:, a German newspaper published from 1861 to 1945, which is categorized in
500:, who runs the bot, and together we began laying down the first bricks of
467:
does not allow predatory journals to be listed on its directory. As such,
337:
Wikimedia and the "seismic shift" towards open-access research publication
298:
Licensed for reuse? Citing open-access sources in Knowledge (XXG) articles
973:. Particularly welcomed would be suggestions for additional sources that
770:
765:
we have, for example, journals and publishers which may merely engage in
388:
1931:? The one where you removed an old talk page entry as "no one cares"?
2335:
journals, these discussions often result in 'Yeah this is published by
2232:
603:
383:), as it aims to identify and combat unreliable sourcing, similarly to
1638:, which is a specific subset of JCW (specifically the pages ending in
456:
782:
476:
855:'s for their help with the creation of several redirects useful to
2031:
WT:WikiProject_Academic_Journals#Talk:Hijacked_journal#bad_reverts
1166:
1157:(Tasks #5 and #6 especially), which creates redirects of the type
950:, or alternatively at a relevant WikiProject's talk page, such as
174:
A new project to find unreliable sources cited by Knowledge (XXG)
2349:
Foobarin is a complex protein discovered by James of Foo in 1942
802:
538:, but it was a good start. Since there are other efforts beyond
55:
889:
508:
parameters of citation templates and cross-check them against
1642:). A thing that will help here is that if you do not see the
1253:
903:
is the equivalent of "true scientific discourse". It isn't.
710:
455:
373:
which are cited by Knowledge (XXG). I've dubbed the project
181:
35:
2017:
And I am getting a teensy bit upset about your hatting and
1865:
But "The Beall website got the terminology wrong" does not
867:
in particular. Hundreds of citations were cleaned up using
2054:, if you want to bring people to a discussion, you give a
1659:
Category:United States government propaganda organizations
937:
unreliable, it does not definitively answer whether it is
602:
could not be included as of writing due to the exorbitant
475:
or about being included in high-reputation databases like
1066:
s web presence has been hijacked (with the fake websites
1023:
As of writing. If you are reading this at a later date,
1939:
1932:
1392:
1385:
1365:
1192:"Bogus journal accepts profanity-laced anti-spam paper"
1028:
699:
253:
Wikimedia Foundation adopts open-access research policy
785:
papers, if you pay them. For false positives, we have
542:
to identify unreliable sources in general, I expanded
733:
International Journal of Advanced Computer Technology
199:
Tens of thousands of freely available sources flagged
851:'s for their help managing the configuration pages,
2062:by injecting your opinion/side all over the place.
1390:If your comment has not appeared here, you can try
484:
402:For context, the JCW compilation takes the various
594:(which are broadly speaking the subcategories of
1407:User talk:Evad37/SPS.js#Publishing script error
1057:For example, the perfectly respectable journal
2058:notice of the discussion happening. You don't
899:What we won't do is pretend that the work of
8:
1927:You mean the article I corrected because it
1751:is. I also don't know what you mean by the
797:hoaxes and nonsensical claims, rather than
657:For example, as of writing, the article on
2325:Beall was right, this is a garbage journal
2452:Knowledge (XXG) Signpost archives 2019-03
632:on an article and looking for links from
606:, they might get included in the future.
240:New guideline for technical collaboration
859:, as well as the help of many people at
18:Knowledge (XXG):Knowledge (XXG) Signpost
1861:? Nope. It quite appears the reverse.
1859:And Beall got his own terminology wrong
1393:
1369:
1182:
995:
598:and a few others). While journals from
530:, rather than journals that range from
483:. The DOAJ advises "to ALWAYS check at
71:
2121:is a neutral noticeboard, yes. It was
1883:Jeffrey Beall did not invent the term
1799:It helps to read the column headers!!!
1646:on the page, you are not dealing with
1629:
1128:(Task #10), which sorts and organizes
505:
428:
403:
2035:directly contradicted by the sources.
1086:. As of writing, the bot will report
863:over the years with various matters,
700:Special:WhatLinksHere/Heinrich Albert
644:, ...). This won't directly tell you
504:. The bot would look for the various
29:
7:
1747:I don't think you understand what a
958:for sources claiming to have proven
720:Get me off Your Fucking Mailing List
387:, which aims to identify and combat
2125:that was not neutral, and violated
1825:TECH REV: Technology Review journal
832:). However, false positives can be
359:A few years back, while working on
1667:Category:Anti-communist propaganda
1524:, but that's not the SourceWatch.
1048:are completely ignored by the bot.
954:for medically dubious sources, or
342:
329:
316:
303:
290:
258:
245:
232:
217:
204:
57:
28:
2399:is written by editors like you –
2023:WP:RS/N#Hijacked_journal_problems
1753:"redlinked journals" in profusion
1632:used across Knowledge (XXG), not
1622:Journals Cited by Knowledge (XXG)
1521:Journals Cited by Knowledge (XXG)
1375:These comments are automatically
1076:www.multidisciplinarywulfenia.org
749:includes sources that range from
679:. This does not mean that citing
572:Directory of Open Access Journals
522:until it was taken down in 2017.
520:predatory journals and publishers
514:, a list maintained by librarian
465:Directory of Open Access Journals
366:Journals Cited by Knowledge (XXG)
2102:a diametrically opposite meaning
1140:(which removes false positives).
149:
139:
129:
119:
109:
99:
89:
1565:(listed quite prominently as a
967:The Knowledge (XXG) SourceWatch
881:lists, or spend months playing
590:, and sources from notoriously
473:lie about having impact factors
376:The Knowledge (XXG) SourceWatch
226:The Knowledge (XXG) SourceWatch
224:
72:The Knowledge (XXG) SourceWatch
1938:my actual use of the sources?
1386:add the page to your watchlist
1213:Wales, Jimmy (23 March 2014).
1190:Beall, J. (20 November 2014).
965:Suggestions on how to improve
931:whether a source is unreliable
1:
2333:literally zero academic worth
2327:, but since Beall classified
1040:Non-templated citations like
791:Category:Paranormal magazines
548:variety of additional sources
361:WikiProject Academic Journals
1725:means the "search" function
1084:Regional Museum of Carinthia
948:reliable sources noticeboard
2050:That's because, again, per
1787:" as the hijacked journal,
1727:is totally useless for this
929:does not definitely answer
691:Deutsche Allgemeine Zeitung
681:Deutsche Allgemeine Zeitung
664:Deutsche Allgemeine Zeitung
596:Category:Pseudo-scholarship
580:non-recommended periodicals
2468:
1929:misrepresented the sources
1434:23:11, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
769:practices such as sending
718:A figure from the famous "
702:, which shows a link from
568:lying about being included
311:Loss of an Internet genius
2385:15:36, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
2314:15:16, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
2293:Can this system by gamed?
2285:02:08, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
2254:02:06, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
2213:01:53, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
2171:01:46, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
2153:01:39, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
2114:01:22, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
2090:00:50, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
2046:00:34, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
1983:21:27, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
1955:21:24, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
1919:20:54, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
1891:and the explanatory note
1887:. Again, see our article
1879:20:52, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
1851:20:46, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
1810:20:41, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
1779:20:35, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
1743:20:34, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
1710:20:29, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
1596:20:16, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
1548:18:53, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
1501:18:15, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
1477:04:54, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
1455:04:42, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
911:
885:against false positives.
779:literally accept anything
469:several journals will lie
1487:- even managing to have
1004:The Wikipiedia CiteWatch
861:Village Pump (technical)
777:, we have journals that
757:, but it also has a few
677:Category:Nazi newspapers
673:Category:Nazi propaganda
399:in scientific journals.
2258:Hmm that's a bummer...
1795:as the genuine journal!
1716:Are you asserting that
1644:big SourceWatch warning
1216:Jimmy Wales's response"
1072:www.wulfeniajournal.com
793:, which may set out to
698:' category, or through
609:Two main ways of using
447:I gave in Montreal for
1934:? The one where you
1383:. To follow comments,
1258:
1068:www.wulfeniajournal.at
939:appropriate to cite it
715:
623:search Knowledge (XXG)
584:self-published sources
460:
431:and then report it at
186:
40:
2187:Talk:Hijacked journal
1816:MIT Technology Review
1792:MIT Technology Review
1718:MIT Technology Review
1675:MIT Technology Review
1563:MIT Technology Review
1483:The "list" is rather
1257:
1196:Scholarly Open Access
1027:may be reported at a
775:definitely unreliable
755:definitely unreliable
714:
630:Special:WhatLinksHere
459:
185:
39:
1379:from this article's
1130:WP:SOURCEWATCH/SETUP
1111:to take care of JCW.
1090:, out of concern it
985:Notes and references
952:WikiProject Medicine
830:rican Journal of ...
822:rican Journal of ...
564:generally unreliable
536:definitely predatory
528:definitely predatory
2331:journals alongside
2029:while your post at
1869:impress me. Sorry.
1625:, a compilation of
1163:Predatory Publisher
1103:From 2009 to 2011,
956:WikiProject Physics
933:. Even if a source
834:manually identified
805:and similar names (
669:Category:Propaganda
588:vanity publications
552:circular references
2025:as a violation of
1657:is categorized in
1612:The New York Times
1579:propaganda sources
1515:The New York Times
1489:The New York Times
1370:Discuss this story
1305:Arbitration report
1259:
1029:different location
901:lunatic charlatans
811:Journal of Science
807:Journal of Science
730:, accepted in the
716:
600:Cabell's blacklist
566:sources, journals
461:
397:retracted research
371:unreliable sources
187:
46:← Back to Contents
41:
2233:the name is taken
2179:poisoned the well
1663:Radio Free Europe
1619:which is part of
1575:Radio Free Europe
1512:To my knowledge,
1474:
1394:purging the cache
1330:From the archives
1320:News from the WMF
1315:Technology report
1295:Discussion report
1159:Predatory Journal
1082:is hosted by the
1010:in May 2019, per
946:discussed at the
941:either. However,
922:
921:
787:hijacked journals
688:, which features
642:.../Questionable3
638:.../Questionable2
592:unreliable fields
353:
352:
51:View Latest Issue
2459:
2436:
2383:
2283:
2260:Time for an RFC!
2242:
2239:
2211:
2151:
2088:
1981:
1917:
1889:hijacked journal
1885:hijacked journal
1849:
1821:hijacked journal
1777:
1749:hijacked journal
1708:
1655:Voice of America
1631:
1606:
1571:Voice of America
1567:hijacked journal
1561:newspapers, the
1546:
1511:
1472:
1468:
1465:
1453:
1452:
1432:
1397:
1395:
1389:
1368:
1300:Featured content
1280:From the editors
1277:
1269:
1262:
1245:
1231:
1230:
1228:
1226:
1210:
1204:
1203:
1198:. Archived from
1187:
1170:
1165:, including the
1147:
1141:
1118:
1112:
1101:
1095:
1065:
1055:
1049:
1045:
1038:
1032:
1021:
1015:
1000:
918:
890:
507:
485:https://doaj.org
430:
420:
413:
405:
395:, which reports
393:Retraction Watch
389:medical quackery
344:
331:
318:
305:
292:
266:
265:
260:
247:
234:
219:
206:
190:
189:Related articles
184:
167:
153:
152:
143:
142:
133:
132:
123:
122:
113:
112:
103:
102:
93:
92:
63:
61:
59:
2467:
2466:
2462:
2461:
2460:
2458:
2457:
2456:
2442:
2441:
2440:
2439:
2438:
2437:
2432:
2430:
2425:
2420:
2415:
2410:
2403:
2393:
2392:
2362:
2295:
2262:
2240:
2237:
2190:
2130:
2067:
2060:poison the well
1960:
1896:
1828:
1783:Beall's lists "
1756:
1687:
1680:indeed hijacked
1648:The SourceWatch
1635:The SourceWatch
1600:
1577:are listed as "
1525:
1505:
1470:
1463:
1444:
1443:
1411:
1399:
1391:
1384:
1373:
1372:
1366:+ Add a comment
1364:
1360:
1359:
1358:
1325:Recent research
1270:
1265:
1263:
1260:
1249:
1248:
1243:
1237:
1236:
1235:
1234:
1224:
1222:
1212:
1211:
1207:
1189:
1188:
1184:
1174:
1173:
1148:
1144:
1134:The SourceWatch
1119:
1115:
1102:
1098:
1063:
1056:
1052:
1043:
1039:
1035:
1022:
1018:
1001:
997:
987:
975:The SourceWatch
969:can be made at
960:aether theories
943:The SourceWatch
927:The SourceWatch
923:
912:
887:
879:The SourceWatch
874:The SourceWatch
869:The SourceWatch
857:The SourceWatch
845:The SourceWatch
838:The SourceWatch
759:false positives
747:The SourceWatch
742:
741:
708:
659:Heinrich Albert
611:The SourceWatch
556:Knowledge (XXG)
546:to draw from a
544:The SourceWatch
502:The SourceWatch
489:
488:
453:
429:|journal=Nature
418:
407:
381:The SourceWatch
356:
355:
354:
349:
317:14 January 2013
304:15 January 2014
246:4 November 2016
205:4 December 2023
194:
193:
188:
182:
177:
176:
169:
168:
162:
161:
160:
159:
150:
140:
130:
120:
110:
100:
90:
84:
81:
70:
66:
64:
54:
53:
48:
42:
32:
26:
25:
24:
12:
11:
5:
2465:
2463:
2455:
2454:
2444:
2443:
2431:
2426:
2421:
2416:
2411:
2406:
2405:
2404:
2395:
2394:
2391:
2390:
2389:
2388:
2387:
2355:
2354:
2353:
2352:
2317:
2316:
2300:
2299:
2294:
2291:
2290:
2289:
2288:
2287:
2228:
2227:
2226:
2225:
2224:
2223:
2222:
2221:
2220:
2219:
2218:
2217:
2216:
2215:
2021:of my post at
2016:
2015:
2014:
2013:
2012:
2011:
2010:
2009:
2008:
2007:
2006:
2005:
2004:
2003:
2002:
2001:
2000:
1999:
1998:
1997:
1996:
1995:
1994:
1993:
1992:
1991:
1990:
1989:
1988:
1987:
1986:
1985:
1685:
1684:
1683:
1670:
1651:
1640:/Questionable#
1615:: That's from
1553:
1552:
1551:
1550:
1481:
1480:
1479:
1446:SchreiberBike
1439:
1438:
1437:
1436:
1374:
1371:
1363:
1362:
1361:
1357:
1355:Community view
1352:
1350:Special report
1347:
1342:
1337:
1332:
1327:
1322:
1317:
1312:
1310:Traffic report
1307:
1302:
1297:
1292:
1287:
1285:News and notes
1282:
1276:
1264:
1252:
1251:
1250:
1240:
1239:
1238:
1233:
1232:
1205:
1202:on 2014-11-22.
1181:
1180:
1179:
1178:
1172:
1171:
1149:Specifically,
1142:
1138:WP:JCW/EXCLUDE
1136:is based) and
1120:Specifically,
1113:
1096:
1050:
1047:
1046:
1033:
1016:
994:
993:
992:
991:
986:
983:
971:WT:SOURCEWATCH
924:
920:
919:
909:
908:
905:
894:
888:
743:
724:David Mazières
717:
709:
686:WP:SOURCEWATCH
655:
654:
626:
619:WP:SOURCEWATCH
496:. I contacted
490:
481:Web of Science
462:
454:
449:Wikimania 2017
437:database dumps
422:
421:
406:parameters of
357:
351:
350:
347:
346:
340:
334:
333:
327:
321:
320:
314:
308:
307:
301:
295:
294:
288:
281:
278:
277:
269:
263:
262:
256:
250:
249:
243:
237:
236:
230:
222:
221:
215:
209:
208:
202:
195:
191:
180:
179:
178:
175:
172:
171:
170:
158:
157:
147:
137:
127:
117:
107:
97:
86:
85:
82:
76:
75:
74:
73:
68:
67:
65:
62:
49:
44:
43:
34:
33:
27:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
2464:
2453:
2450:
2449:
2447:
2435:
2429:
2424:
2419:
2414:
2409:
2402:
2398:
2386:
2381:
2377:
2373:
2369:
2365:
2359:
2358:
2357:
2356:
2350:
2346:
2342:
2338:
2334:
2330:
2326:
2321:
2320:
2319:
2318:
2315:
2311:
2307:
2302:
2301:
2297:
2296:
2292:
2286:
2281:
2277:
2273:
2269:
2265:
2261:
2257:
2256:
2255:
2251:
2247:
2243:
2234:
2230:
2229:
2214:
2209:
2205:
2201:
2197:
2193:
2188:
2184:
2180:
2176:
2175:
2174:
2173:
2172:
2168:
2164:
2160:
2156:
2155:
2154:
2149:
2145:
2141:
2137:
2133:
2128:
2124:
2120:
2117:
2116:
2115:
2111:
2107:
2103:
2098:
2095:
2094:
2093:
2092:
2091:
2086:
2082:
2078:
2074:
2070:
2065:
2061:
2057:
2053:
2052:WP:CANVASSING
2049:
2048:
2047:
2043:
2039:
2036:
2032:
2028:
2024:
2020:
1984:
1979:
1975:
1971:
1967:
1963:
1958:
1957:
1956:
1952:
1948:
1944:
1940:
1937:
1933:
1930:
1926:
1925:
1924:
1923:
1922:
1921:
1920:
1915:
1911:
1907:
1903:
1899:
1895:
1890:
1886:
1882:
1881:
1880:
1876:
1872:
1868:
1864:
1860:
1856:
1855:
1854:
1853:
1852:
1847:
1843:
1839:
1835:
1831:
1826:
1822:
1818:
1817:
1813:
1812:
1811:
1807:
1803:
1800:
1796:
1793:
1790:
1786:
1782:
1781:
1780:
1775:
1771:
1767:
1763:
1759:
1754:
1750:
1746:
1745:
1744:
1740:
1736:
1732:
1728:
1723:
1719:
1715:
1714:
1713:
1712:
1711:
1706:
1702:
1698:
1694:
1690:
1686:
1681:
1677:
1676:
1671:
1668:
1664:
1660:
1656:
1652:
1649:
1645:
1641:
1637:
1636:
1628:
1624:
1623:
1618:
1614:
1613:
1608:
1607:
1604:
1599:
1598:
1597:
1593:
1589:
1584:
1580:
1576:
1572:
1569:) and more.
1568:
1564:
1559:
1558:
1557:
1556:
1555:
1554:
1549:
1544:
1540:
1536:
1532:
1528:
1523:
1522:
1517:
1516:
1509:
1504:
1503:
1502:
1498:
1494:
1490:
1486:
1485:all-inclusive
1482:
1478:
1475:
1473:
1467:
1466:
1458:
1457:
1456:
1451:
1447:
1441:
1440:
1435:
1430:
1426:
1422:
1418:
1414:
1409:
1408:
1403:
1402:
1401:
1400:
1396:
1387:
1382:
1378:
1367:
1356:
1353:
1351:
1348:
1346:
1343:
1341:
1338:
1336:
1333:
1331:
1328:
1326:
1323:
1321:
1318:
1316:
1313:
1311:
1308:
1306:
1303:
1301:
1298:
1296:
1293:
1291:
1288:
1286:
1283:
1281:
1278:
1274:
1268:
1267:31 March 2019
1261:In this issue
1256:
1247:
1221:
1217:
1209:
1206:
1201:
1197:
1193:
1186:
1183:
1176:
1175:
1168:
1164:
1160:
1156:
1152:
1146:
1143:
1139:
1135:
1131:
1127:
1123:
1117:
1114:
1110:
1106:
1100:
1097:
1093:
1089:
1085:
1081:
1078:), while the
1077:
1073:
1069:
1062:
1061:
1054:
1051:
1042:
1041:
1037:
1034:
1030:
1026:
1020:
1017:
1013:
1009:
1008:The CiteWatch
1005:
999:
996:
989:
988:
984:
982:
980:
976:
972:
968:
963:
961:
957:
953:
949:
944:
940:
936:
932:
928:
916:
910:
904:
902:
895:
891:
886:
884:
880:
875:
870:
866:
862:
858:
854:
850:
846:
841:
839:
835:
831:
829:
823:
821:
815:
814:
808:
804:
800:
796:
792:
788:
784:
780:
776:
772:
768:
764:
760:
756:
752:
748:
739:
735:
734:
729:
725:
721:
713:
707:
705:
701:
697:
693:
692:
687:
682:
678:
674:
670:
666:
665:
660:
651:
647:
643:
639:
635:
631:
627:
624:
620:
616:
615:
614:
612:
607:
605:
601:
597:
593:
589:
585:
581:
577:
573:
569:
565:
561:
557:
553:
549:
545:
541:
537:
533:
529:
525:
521:
517:
516:Jeffrey Beall
513:
512:
503:
499:
495:
486:
482:
478:
474:
470:
466:
458:
452:
450:
446:
442:
441:main JCW page
438:
434:
426:
417:
416:
415:
411:
400:
398:
394:
390:
386:
382:
378:
377:
372:
368:
367:
362:
348:
345:
339:
338:
332:
326:
325:
319:
313:
312:
306:
300:
299:
293:
291:30 April 2014
287:
286:
280:
279:
276:
275:
274:
273:More articles
268:
267:
264:
261:
259:25 March 2015
255:
254:
248:
242:
241:
235:
233:31 March 2019
229:
228:
227:
220:
218:27 March 2022
214:
213:
207:
201:
200:
173:
166:
156:
148:
146:
138:
136:
128:
126:
118:
116:
108:
106:
98:
96:
88:
87:
79:
60:
58:31 March 2019
52:
47:
38:
23:
19:
2397:The Signpost
2396:
2348:
2340:
2336:
2332:
2329:questionable
2328:
2324:
2231:Bad news...
2158:
2123:your message
2122:
2101:
2055:
2034:
2018:
1942:
1935:
1928:
1892:
1884:
1866:
1862:
1858:
1824:
1814:
1798:
1794:
1788:
1784:
1752:
1726:
1721:
1673:
1647:
1633:
1626:
1620:
1610:
1578:
1566:
1519:
1513:
1484:
1461:
1460:
1404:
1344:
1290:In the media
1273:all comments
1223:. Retrieved
1208:
1200:the original
1195:
1185:
1162:
1158:
1155:TokenzeroBot
1145:
1133:
1132:(upon which
1116:
1109:WikiStatsBOT
1099:
1091:
1087:
1080:real website
1075:
1071:
1067:
1058:
1053:
1036:
1024:
1019:
1007:
1003:
998:
974:
966:
964:
942:
934:
926:
925:
898:
878:
873:
868:
856:
844:
842:
837:
827:
825:
819:
817:
812:
810:
806:
798:
794:
774:
767:questionable
766:
763:questionable
762:
754:
751:questionable
750:
746:
744:
737:
731:
728:Eddie Kohler
689:
680:
662:
656:
653:publication.
649:
645:
641:
637:
610:
608:
550:, including
543:
540:Beall's List
539:
535:
532:questionable
531:
527:
524:Beall's List
523:
518:to identify
511:Beall's List
509:
501:
491:
423:
401:
380:
374:
364:
358:
341:
335:
328:
322:
315:
309:
302:
296:
289:
283:
282:
272:
271:
270:
257:
251:
244:
238:
231:
225:
223:
216:
210:
203:
197:
196:
95:PDF download
31:SourceWatch.
2434:Suggestions
1785:Tech Review
1377:transcluded
1225:18 February
915:Jimbo Wales
883:Whac-A-Mole
771:spam emails
722:" paper by
694:under the '
578:'s list of
494:August 2018
427:would find
343:14 May 2012
330:28 May 2012
192:Open Access
145:X (Twitter)
2127:WP:CANVASS
2027:WP:CANVASS
1617:WP:JCW/N18
1464:Newslinger
1246:"In focus"
1220:Change.org
1177:References
799:perpetuate
761:. For the
696:Propaganda
576:Quackwatch
560:deprecated
385:Quackwatch
83:Share this
78:Contribute
22:2019-03-31
2428:Subscribe
2306:Guy Macon
2019:rehatting
1630:|journal=
1381:talk page
1151:Tokenzero
1122:Ronhjones
1105:ThaddeusB
865:Galobtter
853:Tokenzero
849:Ronhjones
738:even more
617:Browsing
506:|journal=
498:JLaTondre
445:this talk
433:WP:JCW/N7
404:|journal=
379:(or just
2446:Category
2423:Newsroom
2418:Archives
2401:join in!
2364:Headbomb
2345:WP:MEDRS
2264:Headbomb
2250:contribs
2192:Headbomb
2132:Headbomb
2069:Headbomb
1962:Headbomb
1936:reverted
1898:Headbomb
1830:Headbomb
1758:Headbomb
1689:Headbomb
1527:Headbomb
1413:Headbomb
1345:In focus
1244:Previous
1088:Wulfenia
1060:Wulfenia
1002:Renamed
981:navbox.
410:cite xxx
165:Headbomb
135:Facebook
125:LinkedIn
115:Mastodon
69:In focus
20: |
2343:fail a
2341:usually
2163:Collect
2106:Collect
2056:neutral
2038:Collect
1947:Collect
1871:Collect
1819:is the
1802:Collect
1735:Collect
1731:WP:NPOV
1672:3) The
1603:Collect
1588:Collect
1508:Collect
1493:Collect
781:, even
613:exist:
604:paywall
570:in the
2238:python
2183:WP:RSN
2119:WP:RSN
2097:WP:RSN
2064:WP:RSN
1894:cited.
1335:Humour
1153:coded
1126:RonBot
1124:coded
1107:coded
1025:Nature
979:WP:JCW
795:debunk
783:SCIgen
661:cites
628:Using
477:Scopus
155:Reddit
105:E-mail
2413:About
2241:coder
1867:quite
1627:every
1340:Op-Ed
1167:ISO 4
990:Notes
803:typos
675:: -->
671:: -->
646:which
425:a bot
16:<
2408:Home
2310:talk
2246:talk
2167:talk
2110:talk
2042:talk
1951:talk
1875:talk
1806:talk
1789:and
1739:talk
1678:was
1661:and
1592:talk
1573:and
1497:talk
1471:talk
1227:2019
935:were
726:and
650:some
636:(or
586:and
463:The
391:and
2181:at
1722:not
1720:is
1665:in
1653:2)
1609:1)
1092:may
1012:RFC
1006:or
824:vs
809:vs
753:to
562:or
554:to
534:to
479:or
443:or
163:By
80:—
2448::
2378:·
2374:·
2370:·
2312:)
2304:--
2278:·
2274:·
2270:·
2252:)
2248:|
2206:·
2202:·
2198:·
2169:)
2146:·
2142:·
2138:·
2112:)
2083:·
2079:·
2075:·
2044:)
1976:·
1972:·
1968:·
1953:)
1912:·
1908:·
1904:·
1877:)
1844:·
1840:·
1836:·
1808:)
1772:·
1768:·
1764:·
1741:)
1703:·
1699:·
1695:·
1594:)
1541:·
1537:·
1533:·
1499:)
1450:⌨
1427:·
1423:·
1419:·
1410:.
1242:←
1218:.
1194:.
1161:→
1074:/
1070:/
962:.
917:,
913:—
907:”
893:“
828:me
706:.
640:,
582:,
574:,
558:,
451:.
412:}}
408:{{
363:'
2382:}
2380:b
2376:p
2372:c
2368:t
2366:{
2337:X
2308:(
2282:}
2280:b
2276:p
2272:c
2268:t
2266:{
2244:(
2235:—
2210:}
2208:b
2204:p
2200:c
2196:t
2194:{
2165:(
2150:}
2148:b
2144:p
2140:c
2136:t
2134:{
2108:(
2087:}
2085:b
2081:p
2077:c
2073:t
2071:{
2040:(
1980:}
1978:b
1974:p
1970:c
1966:t
1964:{
1949:(
1916:}
1914:b
1910:p
1906:c
1902:t
1900:{
1873:(
1848:}
1846:b
1842:p
1838:c
1834:t
1832:{
1804:(
1776:}
1774:b
1770:p
1766:c
1762:t
1760:{
1755:.
1737:(
1707:}
1705:b
1701:p
1697:c
1693:t
1691:{
1682:.
1669:.
1650:.
1605::
1601:@
1590:(
1545:}
1543:b
1539:p
1535:c
1531:t
1529:{
1510::
1506:@
1495:(
1448:|
1431:}
1429:b
1425:p
1421:c
1417:t
1415:{
1398:.
1388:.
1275:)
1271:(
1229:.
1064:'
1031:.
1014:.
826:A
820:f
818:A
813:s
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
