Figshare received (and deleted) postprints of 'predatory' journals about a 'mystical effect' (updated)

Recently, I've posted about the self-archiving of academic conference posters in Figshare. I've pointed out many advantages of Figshare comparing to similar services that allow the archiving of preprints, conference posters, datasets and other types of academic production. I myself have published posters and postprints in Figshare, and maintain my opinion about this service's versatility and utility. For me, it is still superior in many aspects to other alternative academic publishing venues. However... Well, there seems always to be some catch! Look to what I saw today when I opened Figshare's site:

The blue pointers are showing my recently uploaded postprints. They were published in small, local academic journals, and do not even have a doi number. I have deposited them in Figshare as self-archiving to ensure a wider visibility to them. I retain the author rights of all the papers, so it is strictly legal. But let's see what the red pointers are depicting. They are all papers published in journals of the infamous Omics Group, classified by the librarian Jeffrey Beall as a "predatory publisher". And they are dozens of postprints!!! Even more weird, they are all papers about this "mystical phenomenon" called the "Trivedi effect®". In the words of Mahendra Trivedi, the owner of the trademark, discoverer and "Trivedi Master™":

'The Trivedi Effect^® is a natural phenomenon that exists within our universe. It is a Divine, intelligent energy that is harnessed by Mahendra Trivedi (or a Trivedi Master^™) and has the ability to transform all living organisms and nonliving materials at the atomic level so as to surpass the ordinary and function at their most potent and unlimited potential for greatness.'

Well, uh, this is not the usual academic, scientific report of facts. So, I care not about Omics Group being 'predatory' or if the "Trivedi effect®" works this way or that. In my view, Omics journals are of low quality, regardless of being anything else, and these papers seem to be commercial advertising disguised as "academic". I am not very pleased to see my own publications posted alongside this kind of material. I thought Figshare would have an editorial check to ensure the overall quality of their repository. This is the kind of occurrence that makes serious researchers unease to use some online service.

In my previous evaluation, I was too tough with F1000research, and I am aware that it has indeed problems with content and editorial checking, but I bet this kind of stuff would never be accepted by F1000research, let alone be publicized in its main page! An advice to researchers: choose wisely the online channel for your academic material. Some "neighbors" are quite bothersome.

Update (01/17/2016): to my happiness, all troublesome uploads about the "Trivedi Effect" were most likely withdrawn from figshare. A quick search in its repository for these terms has got no results. Thank you, figshare team!

Using Figshare

Well before I became interested in institutional repositories for posters and slides, I had already started depositing them in  Slideshare, a cloud storage service that allows you to view slides on websites, blogs, social networks, and more. This feature of Slideshare always pleased me a lot. It had everything I found interesting to spread ideas: automatic integration with LinkedIn and other social networks, snippets for easy incorporation into blogs, personal, institutional and other pages, as well as a personal page that centralized all my uploads. In addition to all these goodies, it featured online editing and traffic analysis. But Slideshare is not a publishing venue. Its content has no integration for scientific citation.

When I first met F1000Research, I found their proposal interesting and that it filled a gap in this non-traditional form of publication. I soon noticed several differences from Slideshare: apart from the public storage of a presentation, all the rest of the features found in Slideshare are missing from the F1000Research. The biggest difference is that on this last platform, the poster receives a quotable DOI. Well, looking for alternatives, I found a platform that brings together the best of F1000Research with the best (almost) of Slideshare: Figshare.

By posting slideshows on that platform, I was impressed by its simple and straightforward interface, allowing for submission in a few minutes. You can choose bookmarks (unlike F1000Research, which gave me a problem), choose the sharing level and the publishing license, as in Slideshare (in F1000Research the publications are always public and licensed CC-BY). In addition, it has room for metadata, full version control (can be edited), desktop uploader application, allows you to choose whether to use a DOI or not, among other features. It seems to me that the only thing that Slideshare has that Figshare does not have are the tools of traffic analysis.

There is no limit to the language and type of material to be submitted, EXCEPT that it must necessarily be academic material. Preprints, published articles (since you own copyright rights), theses, dissertations, monographs, classes, notes, research data, anything related to the world of academia. No commercial or corporate use, advertising or material deemed inappropriate is allowed. Content is published immediately. Subsequently, anything that violates the terms of use is deleted without notice.

Figshare has a personal page with its publications and snippets for incorporation into websites and blogs and has facilities for social networks. See below for one of the slides I posted in Figshare:


The DOI number assigned by Figshare is from DataCite, not from CrossRef, if that really makes any difference. Concluding, in my opinion, the ideal academic platform to deposit alternative material, including posters, slides, assorted texts, etc. is Figshare. Despite the positive features of F1000Research, its platform has a lot to grow to face Figshare.

Update: unfortunately, I later encountered a negative feature of Figshare. See here in my post.

Usando o figshare

Bem antes de me interessar por repositórios institucionais para pôsteres e slides, eu já havia começado a depositá-los no Slideshare, serviço de armazenamento na nuvem que permite a visualização de slides em sites, blogs, redes sociais, etc. Esta funcionalidade do Slideshare sempre me agradou muito. Ele tinha tudo o que eu achava interessante para difusão de idéias: integração automática com o LinkedIn e outras redes sociais, snippets para incorporação fácil em blogs, páginas pessoais, institucionais e outras, além de uma página pessoal que centralizava todos os meus carregamentos. Além de todas estas facilidades, funcionalidades de edição online e análise de tráfego. Mas o Slideshare não é uma via de publicação. Seu conteúdo não tem facilidades para citação científica.

Quando conheci o F1000Research, achei sua proposta interessante e que preenchia uma lacuna nesta forma não tradicional de publicação. Logo notei várias diferenças em relação ao Slideshare: à parte o armazenamento público de uma apresentação, todo o resto das funcionalidades encontradas no Slideshare faltam no F1000Research. A maior diferença é que nesta última plataforma, o pôster recebe um DOI citável. Bem, buscando alternativas, encontrei uma plataforma que reúne o melhor do F1000Research com o melhor (quase tudo) do Slideshare: o Figshare.

Ao postar apresentações de slides naquela plataforma, fiquei impressionado com sua interface simples e direta, permitindo uma submissão em poucos minutos. É possível escolher marcadores (ao contrário do F1000Research, o que me rendeu um problema), escolher o nível de compartilhamento e a licença de publicação, como no Slideshare (no F1000Research as publicações são sempre públicas e com licença CC-BY). Além disso, tem espaço para metadados, controle completo de versões (pode ser editado), aplicativo uploader para desktop, permite escolher se vai usar um DOI ou não, entre outras funcionalidades. Parece-me que a única coisa que o Slideshare tem que o Figshare não tem são as ferramentas de análise de tráfego.

Não há limites quanto à linguagem e tipo de material a ser submetido, EXCETO que precisa necessariamente ser material acadêmico. Preprints, artigos publicados (desde que não firam direitos autorais), teses, dissertações, monografias, aulas, notas, dados de pesquisa, qualquer coisa relacionada ao mundo da academia. Não é permitido uso comercial ou corporativo, nem propaganda, ou material considerado inapropriado. O conteúdo é publicado imediatamente. Posteriormente, qualquer coisa que infrinja os termos de uso é deletado sem aviso.

O Figshare tem uma página pessoal com suas publicações e snippets para incorporação em sites e blogs e tem facilidades para redes sociais. Veja aqui embaixo uma das aulas que publiquei no Figshare:

 O número de DOI atribuído pelo Figshare é do DataCite, e não do CrossRef, se isso fizer realmente alguma diferença. Concluindo, em minha opinião, a plataforma acadêmica ideal para depositar material alternativo, incluindo pôsteres, slides, textos variados, etc é o Figshare. Apesar das características positivas do F1000Research, sua plataforma tem muito que crescer para fazer frente ao Figshare.

Atualização: infelizmente, conheci posteriormente uma característica negativa do Figshare. Veja aqui na minha postagem.