The A-Z list of 700 ecology/nature titles indexed in JURN is now hosted on this main blog. Please update your bookmarks and Web links.
GRAFT has updated. GRAFT now enables a Google search across 4,801 repositories, records and fulltext alike. Please access via the page linked above, rather than a bookmark, to enjoy the newly added range.
Just over 50 repositories have been added, since my April update. 25 ‘http: -> https:’ duplicates have also been removed, these having crept in since GRAFT started.
Distant Worlds (cultures of the ancient world)
Yearbook of the International Society of History Didactics (one year paywall)
Journal of Dracula Studies (was lost, now relocated)
Since the Beall’s List -listed publisher Asian Network for Scientific Information (ANSInet) no longer has titles in the DOAJ, they were yesterday removed from JURN.
I note that MDPI’s journal titles remain in the DOAJ, and thus remain in JURN (via indexing their “special issues” pages only).
So far as I’m aware, these were the only two ‘Beall-questioned’ publishers in JURN. Although Beall has sometimes nibbled at the MDPI, I note that they were removed November 2015 and the MDPI is no longer on his current List.
The only real loss, as regards ANSInet and JURN’s comprehensive coverage of eco titles, is their Plant Pathology Journal. I’m open to re-indexing that title, if anyone experienced in plant pathologies can persuade me that articles from that particular title should be findable via JURN.
I’ve temporarily removed the DOAJ records from JURN, just for a couple of days, until Google Search re-indexes the DOAJ — and thus flushes out the many “An error has occurred” results on DOAJ links (which arise from the DOAJ’s mass removal of 3,300 journals this week).
Forum Geometricorum (classical geometry)
ACME : An International E-Journal for Critical Geographies (was lost, now found again)
Journal of Ecocriticism (was lost, now found again)
A useful tip for those who moderate a Facebook group. Search of the group’s posts is case-sensitive. Searching for “acrylic” won’t find “Acrylic”, for instance.
The DOAJ removed 3,300 open access journals yesterday, because the editors didn’t re-apply…
“We will add a third tab to our spreadsheet ‘DOAJ: journals added and removed’ that will list all of the journals removed.”
The DuckDuckGo search-engine has given $225k to a range of worthy open-source projects working on privacy, free speech and snoop-free communications.
I’ve just heard about the museum fire in Delhi, the capital of India…
“A huge blaze gutted India’s Museum of Natural History Tuesday, destroying six floors of the building and possibly countless collections of the country’s flora and fauna […] The museum is the first and only natural history museum in India [and was] also home to a reference library for scholars [with] more than 15,000 books.”
One hopes that there were no un-scanned unique archival runs of vintage paper journals, or unique notebooks, in the Library.
While the Museum’s traditional ‘stuffed animals’ style of presentation may have appeared antiquated to many Western and (it appears) a few Indian curators, its steady educational work seems to have encouraged real interest in the natural world among receptive young people in the city. One Indian wrote of the fire online…
“We have all been here, and knowing that this beautiful place — with its host of priceless artefacts — doesn’t exist any more is heart wrenching.”
The newly-discovered book-length text by Walt Whitman, Manly Health and Training, has very kindly been published in full today in open access at the Walt Whitman Quarterly Review.
A new Medium article, from the head of Ingenta Connect, “Is the Open Access discoverability problem solvable? And whose problem is it?”. It’s a cursory look at the problem, but even then it’s interesting for what it doesn’t say…
* For “institutional librarians” the author seems to imply that their future role is only to be in one-to-one “mentoring and facilitation” of researchers. No mention of anything else, like the big publishers working with librarians to craft and adopt universal OA-status tagging code for discoverability.
* For “scholarly authors” he only suggests academics might become marketeers for their own papers. Frankly, this seems like a waste of their valuable time. Given the salaries that full-time research academics get, they can afford to hire a virtual assistant. To promote four or five papers a year outside of one’s own disciplinary niche, simply go to UpWork (or similar) and hire your personal marketeer at $180 a paper (to get someone of quality, for a day and-a-half of work). One could probably find a way to write the $900 bill off against tax each year. Of course that assumes one is publishing something worth reading, rather than academic shovel-ware intended to tick boxes inside one’s own institution.
* For the big “publishers” the article vaguely suggests they need to embrace openness. Though perhaps only in order to capture it for their own purposes, via a… “drawing-together of all the dispersed OA content silos into one place”. Well, for their own limited set of OA content, the big publishers can solve that on Monday morning if they really want it. They just have to allow the seemingly-stalled Paperity to import the OA-only article feeds of Elsevier, Brill, Degruyter, Wiley and others, so that Paperity has full coverage of all OA articles from the big publishers.