Talk:Allied Academies/Archive 1

Archive 1

Attention: Obscure news on Allied Academies

The word reportedly fraudulent at lead section is not acceptable, the source also was not reported as fraudulent. As per the source following can be kept at controversies /history section but not at the lead

In January 2017, Canadian Broadcasting Corporation reported two conferences to be held in August 2017 at Toronto resembles like fake conferences. Const. Jenifferjit Sidhu said that there is no clear evidence about those conferences have done anything illegal or mishandling, and there is no complaint to say lost money. However, CBS has questionable reputation of its news reports.

What Every Intellect Must Know about Allied Academies

Allied Academies is an assimilated and holistic approach to support and reinforce the innovative research to complete development value chain for accelerating scientific innovations. Allied Academies focuses on Partnerships with national and international scientific groups to support scientific publications and to organize international conferences where discussions and networking on novel ideas at international scientific platform. https://euagenda.eu/organisers/allied-academies Rvkandisa (talk) 06:59, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. SparklingPessimist ^{Scream at me!} 07:09, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 October 2017

42.111.126.175 (talk) 17:30, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 October 2017

I found Allied academies conferences would be a collective effort to accelerate scientific discovery and may provide a platform to support Researchers, Academicians and Industry. 42.111.126.175 (talk) 17:47, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. SparklingPessimist ^{Scream at me!} 17:58, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

"reportedly-fraudulent"

@MaoGo: Thanks for catching my mistake in joining facts from two sources. I was actually trying to get rid of the hyphenation, then ended up rewording, poorly, at that; I just deleted the superfluous hyphen instead. Lindenfall (talk) 23:59, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Predatory publishers, fake conferences and academics who find them a way to succeed

At World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology (WASET] an to AfD it Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology (2nd nomination) and discussions raised at RSN and NPOVN spurred me and other editors to look for current sources. Some of these sources discuss OMICS and Allied Academies, recently acquired by OMICS along with Future Medicine.

These have sparked a number of articles in the mainstream media and complaints by academics, while at the same time some academics are cooperating.

A study reported in the Japan Times[1] by James McCrostie looks at fake conferences in Japan. McCrostie discusses submitting fake papers generated by SCIgen to fake conferences all of which were accepted. It also discusses both the cost to attendees for these conferences (which are cheap to run) and the damage that can be done to reputations.

The New York Times published an article last month[2] called "Many Academics Are Eager to Publish in Worthless Journals". It also discusses aspects of predatory journals such as using names almost identical to prestigious ones, the fact that many or most don't have paper publications or do serious reviews, etc. And the fact that publishing in them is a way for academics to get promoted. "Many faculty members — especially at schools where the teaching load is heavy and resources few — have become eager participants in what experts call academic fraud that wastes taxpayer money, chips away at scientific credibility, and muddies important research." Senior academics publish in them -- 200 McGill University professsors, for instance.[3]

They also run fake conferences where by paying a hefty fee an academic can be listed as a presenter even if they don't attend. It's also easy to become an editor of a fake journal. A fictional academic with ludicrous credentials applied to 360 open-access journals asking to become an editor, with 48 accepting her, 4 making her editor-in-chief.[4][5] See also this article.

There are now more predatory conferences than scholarly ones.[6] Many of these are run by Waset: "research into Waset, which is registered in the United Arab Emirates, shows that it will hold some 183 events in 2018, although these will cover almost 60,000 individual “conferences” – averaging 320 at each event. Conferences are scheduled almost every day up until the end of 2030." These take place in small rooms with multiple conferences held in each room but few attendees, although many will have paid a large sum to attend.

An article last month in Die Zeit[7] says the ownership of WASET is unknown, and "website of Waset does not give an address anywhere. Interested parties can only fill out an anonymous form or send an SMS - with the United Arab Emirates dialing code." "The purpose of a waset conference is to extend the CV by a conference as well as a contribution in a scientific journal. Because every lecture is published in an online publication, which is also published by Waset. Over 40,000 articles are said to have come together since 1999, according to the website."

There are more sources of course, I could go on and on. And warnings from academics.[8][9][10][11] Doug Weller talk 13:00, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

I would like to guide people to this ANI incident report which formally banned representatives of OMICS Publishing Group (who have a partnership Allied Academies) from editing Wikipedia. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 06:11, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Creation

I am a new wiki but I have a much better feel for it after spending many hours going through the different tools. I have created a page for 'allied academies' and done my best to adhere to the guidelines as best as I know how. I suspect I will need to make a few more updates to the content, but I wanted to get some feedback from others as to whether this looks okay so far. Your insights are appreciated. Thatsthesound (talk) 00:57, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

I am also new to editing Wikipedia. However, in the case of this particular publisher, I have always wondered if it was a predatory publisher (however, it is not listed in Jeffrey Beall's list of preditory publishers). I would have much more faith in this article if there were some references not linked to the publisher.--Derek Pyne2 (talk) 21:54, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

I see that Allied Academies has been added to Beall's list of preditory publishers (https://scholarlyoa.com/publishers/). Should this fact be added to the page? Derek Pyne2 (talk) 22:16, 2 February 2016 (UTC)