Downloads provided by UsageCounts
This paper, about a fictional creature (a Pokémon) was submitted to, and accepted by, the journal Archives of Veterinary Science and Medicine. The paper is loaded with statements, explicit and implicit, that it is a fake paper about a fake creature and that the journal which published it is predatory. To directly quote it: "we encourage all scientists avoid publishing in this journal or any others by its publisher, Fortune Journals, which is clearly predatory and does not practice peer review, and remind universities that a publication here is worthless when it comes to evaluating the performance of a scientist or faculty member." While the paper was accepted, the journal requested payment to publish it, which the author was unwilling to pay. We post it here, along with the acceptance letter, as proof that AVSM is a predatory journal and that Fortune Journals is a predatory publisher.
scientific ethics, pokemon, predatory journals, predatory publishing.
scientific ethics, pokemon, predatory journals, predatory publishing.
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
| views | 52 | |
| downloads | 45 |

Views provided by UsageCounts
Downloads provided by UsageCounts