Journal analysis and consultancy services exist; but most stay on the surface, cost a lot, and details escape the human eye. In index applications the rejection reply is usually a few sentences — it never says which page, which missing statement.
JournalEvaluate was built for that gap: it audits your entire journal against evidence and puts the reasons for rejection in front of you before you apply.
Our criteria are a compilation, not a guess — structured from three sources:
The official application criteria of DOAJ, Scopus, Web of Science and TR Dizin — followed to the letter and kept current.
A pattern catalogue distilled from hundreds of journals' rejection replies — we know what evaluators flag.
COPE principles, open-access standards and the established good practices of scholarly publishing.
We never say “have an ethics policy” — we show which sentence is missing on which page, with evidence.
From identity to licensing, ethics to archiving — every layer of your journal in a single audit, with honest levels instead of a score.
Next to every finding sits evidence taken from your own site with a clickable source link — no claim is printed without proof.
We don't say “fix it”; we write the text. Every action-plan item comes with ready-made wording you can paste into your site.
Re-scan at a discount as you fix things: resolved items get marked, new and regressed items are separated, and your progress accumulates in the report.
Every audit goes through a multi-stage review: the site is crawled in full and every finding is tied to evidence taken from your pages. Before a report is published it passes dozens of automated quality checks.
We state our limits as clearly as our strengths:
Below you see just ONE sample criterion from each area — the full list arrives in your report, each one assessed with evidence.
“ISSN sitede beyan edilmiş ve ana sayfadan kolay erişilir mi?”
“İletişim bilgileri yeterli mi (sorumlu kişi, kurumsal e-posta, açık adres)?”
“Dergi tek ve net bir Creative Commons lisansı beyan ediyor mu (dergi + makale düzeyinde tutarlı)?”
“Telif hakkının kimde kaldığı sitede tek ve net bir cevapla belirtilmiş mi?”
“Ücret politikası sitede açıkça yer alıyor mu (APC alınıyor/alınmıyor net beyan)?”
“Hakem değerlendirme tipi (çift kör vb.) sitede beyan edilmiş mi?”
“Yayın etiği sayfası mevcut ve kapsamı yeterli mi?”
“Kurul üyelerinin kurum ve ülke bilgileri eksiksiz mi?”
“Amaç ve kapsam beyanı net, detaylı ve hedef kitlesi tanımlı mı?”
“Makale başlık/öz/anahtar kelimeleri derginin dil profiline uygun dillerde eksiksiz mi?”
“DOI kullanılıyor ve tüm makalelerde tek/tutarlı bir prefix ile mi?”
“Arşivleme politikası sayfası mevcut mu?”
“Dizinler sayfası kategorik düzende mi (indeks / keşif / tanımlayıcı / arşiv ayrımı)?”
“Yayın periyodu beyan edilmiş ve son sayılarda fiilen uyulmuş mu (geç veya erken sapma yok mu)?”
“Site sayfalarında (politika/menü/footer) kırık iç veya dış bağlantı var mı?”
Type your journal address — the system handles the rest.
Start the Audit →