Skip to main content
replaced non-functional link with archive link
Source Link
lighthouse keeper
  • 26.1k
  • 3
  • 67
  • 118

For what it's worth, an archived version of Beall's list close to its deletion can be found at at archive.org. Note that it will necessarily decrease in accuracy and completeness over time.

His other lists are also archived. You can find a collection of links at Debunking Denialism.

Additionally, note that Beall's "criteria" are still publicly availablepublicly available, and some might argue that they are at least as useful as the list, as they teach a man how to fish. While I have seen the objectivity of the list being doubted, I've rarely seen people criticize the objectivity of the criteria.

For what it's worth, an archived version of Beall's list close to its deletion can be found at at archive.org. Note that it will necessarily decrease in accuracy and completeness over time.

His other lists are also archived. You can find a collection of links at Debunking Denialism.

Additionally, note that Beall's "criteria" are still publicly available, and some might argue that they are at least as useful as the list, as they teach a man how to fish. While I have seen the objectivity of the list being doubted, I've rarely seen people criticize the objectivity of the criteria.

For what it's worth, an archived version of Beall's list close to its deletion can be found at at archive.org. Note that it will necessarily decrease in accuracy and completeness over time.

His other lists are also archived. You can find a collection of links at Debunking Denialism.

Additionally, note that Beall's "criteria" are still publicly available, and some might argue that they are at least as useful as the list, as they teach a man how to fish. While I have seen the objectivity of the list being doubted, I've rarely seen people criticize the objectivity of the criteria.

For what it's worth, an archived version of Beall's list close to its deletion can be found at at archive.org. Note that it will necessarily decrease in accuracy and completeness over time.

His other lists are also archived. You can find a collection of links at https://debunkingdenialism.com/2017/01/16/what-happened-to-jeffrey-bealls-list-of-allegedly-predatory-publishers/Debunking Denialism.

Additionally, note that Beall's "criteria" are still publicly available, and some might argue that they are at least as useful as the list, as they teach a man how to fish. While I have seen the objectivity of the list being doubted, I've rarely seen people criticize the objectivity of the criteria.

For what it's worth, an archived version of Beall's list close to its deletion can be found at at archive.org. Note that it will necessarily decrease in accuracy and completeness over time.

His other lists are also archived. You can find a collection of links at https://debunkingdenialism.com/2017/01/16/what-happened-to-jeffrey-bealls-list-of-allegedly-predatory-publishers/.

Additionally, note that Beall's "criteria" are still publicly available, and some might argue that they are at least as useful as the list, as they teach a man how to fish. While I have seen the objectivity of the list being doubted, I've rarely seen people criticize the objectivity of the criteria.

For what it's worth, an archived version of Beall's list close to its deletion can be found at at archive.org. Note that it will necessarily decrease in accuracy and completeness over time.

His other lists are also archived. You can find a collection of links at Debunking Denialism.

Additionally, note that Beall's "criteria" are still publicly available, and some might argue that they are at least as useful as the list, as they teach a man how to fish. While I have seen the objectivity of the list being doubted, I've rarely seen people criticize the objectivity of the criteria.

added 236 characters in body
Source Link
darij grinberg
  • 6.9k
  • 1
  • 26
  • 43

For what it's worth, an archived version of Beall's list close to its deletion can be found at at archive.org. Note that it will necessarily decrease in accuracy and completeness over time.

His other lists are also archived. You can find a collection of links at https://debunkingdenialism.com/2017/01/16/what-happened-to-jeffrey-bealls-list-of-allegedly-predatory-publishers/.

Additionally, note that Beall's "criteria" are still publicly available, and some might argue that they are at least as useful as the list, as they teach a man how to fish. While I have seen the objectivity of the list being doubted, I've rarely seen people criticize the objectivity of the criteria.

For what it's worth, an archived version of Beall's list close to its deletion can be found at at archive.org. Note that it will necessarily decrease in accuracy and completeness over time.

Additionally, note that Beall's "criteria" are still publicly available, and some might argue that they are at least as useful as the list, as they teach a man how to fish. While I have seen the objectivity of the list being doubted, I've rarely seen people criticize the objectivity of the criteria.

For what it's worth, an archived version of Beall's list close to its deletion can be found at at archive.org. Note that it will necessarily decrease in accuracy and completeness over time.

His other lists are also archived. You can find a collection of links at https://debunkingdenialism.com/2017/01/16/what-happened-to-jeffrey-bealls-list-of-allegedly-predatory-publishers/.

Additionally, note that Beall's "criteria" are still publicly available, and some might argue that they are at least as useful as the list, as they teach a man how to fish. While I have seen the objectivity of the list being doubted, I've rarely seen people criticize the objectivity of the criteria.

added 51 characters in body
Source Link
eykanal
  • 48.8k
  • 18
  • 121
  • 219
Loading
Source Link
darij grinberg
  • 6.9k
  • 1
  • 26
  • 43
Loading