Template talk:Predatory open access source list

This template is part of WikiProject Reliability, a collaborative effort to improve the reliability of Wikipedia articles. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ReliabilityWikipedia:WikiProject ReliabilityTemplate:WikiProject ReliabilityReliability articles

Academic Journals

This template 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

False positive; implementation error

This edit has been flagged incorrectly as introducing a predatory journal. As best I can tell, the problem is that I added a reference with doi:10.54550/ECA2022V2S3R20 and the system is flagging it because the identifier agrees with ScopeMed (doi:10.5455). I presume this is some sort of regex error; it should be fixable by matching the string "doi:10.5455/.*" instead of "doi:10.5455.*" (or whatever). I hope this is the right place to report; the edit notice doesn't tell you where to report errors. 100.36.106.199 (talk) 13:05, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, fixed, see Special:AbuseFilter/history/891/diff/prev/32275. The usual place for these reports is WP:EF/FP; MediaWiki talk pages are barely watched. (Courtesy ping Headbomb). Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 17:47, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I realized this was low-traffic, but couldn’t figure out the right place to ask. 100.36.106.199 (talk) 12:04, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Filter message should be more clear

Got the automatic edit filter notice about using references in this list. But surely you can't expect someone to go through each DOI one-by-one to see which DOI(s) triggered the filter right? And as the list grows, that check will only take longer and longer. Can the filter message be more clear and specific, such as "your reference includes [inserts the violating DOI prefix]..."? Paging Headbomb. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 17:23, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You can use WP:UPSD to easily identify which citation is problematic. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 18:56, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]