User talk:Headbomb/unreliable

Business Wire

The press release agency Business Wire (businesswire.com) should probably be added to the script in the same Generally Unreliable category as PR Newswire, I was reviewing a draft submission that cited it and it didn't get flagged by the script —pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 03:18, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

@Pythoncoder:

I think I generally agree with you here, but I'd want an RSN dicussion before coloring Business Wire anything, just to make sure there's not something we're missing about it.

It would also suggest possibly adding Press Releases as its own category on RSNP, with PR Newswire and Business Wire as examples of it, much like WP:RSNPREPRINTS. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 14:40, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

International Journal of Health Policy and Management

Why is it listed as predatory? I don't see the journal or the publisher in Beal's list.

It's Q1 in SJR Bogazicili (talk) 19:16, 5 July 2025 (UTC)

Do you have a link to an article where it's being flagged? Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 21:52, 5 July 2025 (UTC)

I can tell you it's flagged because it's published by the Maad Rayan Publishing Company, which publishes at least a few predatory journals (like Journal of Herbmed Pharmacology). I haven't checked all the journals, so it's possible this one is OK, but many are complete crap. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 22:19, 5 July 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. It's weird, I'm seeing the publisher different in some places. [1] Bogazicili (talk) 18:59, 6 July 2025 (UTC)

I have no information about this specific journal, but it is not unusual for a predatory publisher to buy up a formerly-reputable journal from another publisher and turn it into a predatory journal. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:11, 6 July 2025 (UTC)

It's also possible that Maad Rayan Publishing Company is no longer the publisher. Bogazicili (talk) 20:20, 6 July 2025 (UTC)

If it was highlighted, it was highlighted because of the DOI, which meant that at the time of publication, it was under Maad Rayan.

Maad Rayan also publishes on behalf of other organizations, so it's also possible that the Official Organization of Not Stupid People of Borduria just have a partnership with Maad Rayan to publish the journal, but that they still do review in house.

In any case, it's enough for me to move Maad Rayan from red to yellow. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 20:48, 6 July 2025 (UTC)

ISBNs

I've observed that ISBNs beginning in 979, rather than 978, are more likely than not to be self-published, and often AI-generated. 979 was introduced in 2019, so I think it's largely that more established publishers still use the 978 codes assigned to them in the past, while newer self-publishing companies started in recent years receive 979 codes. The publisher is encoded in the ISBN, so it might be possible to identify self-publishing companies or whitelist publishers who have codes beginning in 979. Probably needs more analysis before we make a rule out of it. Apocheir (talk) 22:59, 6 July 2025 (UTC)

ISBN have a structure where there's a registrant element. If that can be mapped to a crap publisher, then it would be possible for a script like mine to pickup on them. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 23:52, 6 July 2025 (UTC)

In my puttering as of late, I've found that 979 plus a publisher of "Independently published" means self-published through Amazon in every case I've come across so far. It doesn't seem to correspond to any particular pattern in ISBN aside from starting with 979-8 (8 is just the country code), or even be consistent with the author. Of course it wouldn't be that easy... Apocheir (talk) 02:52, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Washington Free Beacon

Looks like WP:FREEBEACON may need to be re-classified following a recent RfC. - Amigao (talk) 01:37, 22 July 2025 (UTC)

Moved to Yellow, as date-dependant. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 03:30, 22 July 2025 (UTC)