Talk:Critical Reviews in Toxicology

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Academic Journals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Academic Journals on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Academic JournalsWikipedia:WikiProject Academic JournalsTemplate:WikiProject Academic JournalsAcademic Journal articles
See WikiProject Academic Journals' writing guide for tips on how to improve this article.

Untitled

After addition of information about impact, total citations and the editor (including references), the article is no stub anymore. --Shisha-Tom (talk) 15:17, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Predatory and pseudoscientific character

Just to open a debate to end "edit war" and build consensus on this question. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scientificrigor12 (talk • contribs) 18:24, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What debate? You're not giving any arguments... --Randykitty (talk) 18:27, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Professor George arguments are based on reliable sources and his article is well documented. What are your arguments to prove that this journal is a peer-reviewed journal ?

https://www.professeur-alexandre-georges.info/tf-file-translation

--Scientificrigor12

"Professor" George's rather incoherent rants (both the English and the French versions) are not at all based on any sources. He presents four links at the start of his blog post. The Bloomberg one is about OMICS and doesn't mention T&F. Neither do the two Nature articles. The fourth link is to the WP article where you inserted this information based on that blog post... The (critical) article by the Center for Public Integrity referenced in the article actually does a good job of confirming that the journal is peer reviewed (that this peer review occasionally fails is something different). --Randykitty (talk) 18:47, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but the Center for Public Integrity did not confirm that it is a peer reviewed journal. Please read their article. And you use "" to talk about Professor George title. He shared an translated version (in English) of his degree, coming from a sworn translator, expert at the Douai Court of Appeal: https://www.professeur-alexandre-georges.info/information-and-documentation

I wont agree with your revisions as long as you will present this journal as a peer reviewed journal. It is not. We can delete Dolos list soure, but never write "peer-reviewed", because of Center for Public Integrity article.

--Scientificrigor12 —Preceding undated comment added 18:57, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the English translation of the silly French document is correct. That doesn't remove the fact that the silly French document doesn't prove anything. As I told you before, there are no "professor" diploma's in France (or elsewhere, as far as I know). And if you read the Center for Public Integrity article carefully, you'll see that several reputed scientists claim to have reviewed for this journal. And the Center's article never says that this journal is not peer reviewed at all. As far as I can see, the whole brouhaha is about one Monsanto-related article. Even if the Center is correct in their assertion that peer review failed in this case, that doesn't mean this journal is not peer reviewed in general. And George's claim that T&F is the world's worst predatory publisher, in a world where we also have OMICS Publishing, that just shows that this person has no clue what he's talking about. --Randykitty (talk) 19:24, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Moreover, that "professor's diploma" was issued to Georges by the very organization Georges is the founding president of. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 19:59, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]