Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/African Journal of Biotechnology

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:59, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

African Journal of Biotechnology[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A journal with no impact factor from a Nigerian predatory open access publishing company. Guy (Help!) 13:39, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academic journals-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 13:53, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 13:53, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete To my shame I see that I edited this, but to my defense: that was years ago when predatory publishing was not yet as much recognized as now. Despite it not meeting NJournals, I guess I left it alone as a misguided "affirmative action", given the difficulties that scientists in Africa face. But, of course, no difficulties justify creating scam journals. --Randykitty (talk) 14:16, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Easy mistake to make, the entire point of these journals is that they look legit at face value. Guy (Help!) 16:04, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom and Randykitty. Ajpolino (talk) 19:49, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Unfortunately, it appears that JzG is in error, this does have an impact factor according to this and this. Are these sites wrong? EdChem (talk) 01:17, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, those sites are wrong. Check the Thomson Reuters Master Journal List and you'll see that this journal is not indexed by them. Scijournal.org is a fake IF provider published by ISI. Note that this misleadingly stands for "International Scientific Institute" and not for "Institute for Scientific Information", the organization that publishes the Journal Citation Reports. ResearchGate calculates its own IFs (see the note immediately below the IF of 0.44 that they report), but as far as I know, nobody pays any attention to those... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Randykitty (talk • contribs)

Delete: Thanks, Randykitty, that was the link I was looking for to check definitively. I can't see any policy grounds to support keeping this article, it is on Beall's list, is published by a predatory publisher, and I see nothing from it that would support classification as notable. EdChem (talk) 02:16, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

delete non-notable journal by predatory publisher - would need discussion of its low quality in multiple RS in order to for us to write an NPOV article, and those do not exist. Jytdog (talk) 02:09, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 13:16, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.