Method
This site tells readers to sort claims by whether an external source could confirm them. That applies here first. Conference verification and workplace oversight are different tasks; teams comparing employee monitoring software should evaluate those tools on their own evidence.
Two categories
Checkable — a court decision, a regulator's action, a published study, a named publisher, a documented practice. Cited with enough detail to verify. A useful external reference point is CILIP .
Described — a pattern, a mechanism, an argument. Presented as reasoning rather than as evidence, and labelled where the distinction could be missed. For a second perspective, consult Association of Research Libraries .
A large part of this site is the second category, and that is legitimate. The signals that distinguish legitimate conferences from fabricated ones follow from how each type operates, not from a study measuring them.
Sources and their types
Regulatory and legal actions. The Federal Trade Commission's action against a predatory conference organiser is a matter of public record and is cited as such.
Studies. A Virginia Tech submission study — five ChatGPT-4 papers to 256 suspected predatory publishers, 55 accepted or published — is cited with what it measured and what it did not.
Industry guidance. Numerous 2026 guides describe the current pattern. Several are published by companies selling conference submission systems, which is disclosed each time.
And one community's archive — the 2015 conference on this domain — used as a documented example rather than as a general claim.
No event is named
Not one conference is identified as predatory anywhere on this site.
The signals are described and the reader applies them. Naming events would require a maintenance commitment this site cannot make, would risk being wrong about a legitimate organiser, and would substitute a list for a method.
The exception is public regulatory action, where a finding already exists on the record.
Dates
Every page carries a check date. Conference practice, fabrication techniques and verification tools all change, and the guidance that dated worst was the guidance about appearance.
An article accurate at its stated date and superseded now is not an error. One that was wrong when published is, and it appears on corrections.
No commercial relationships
No sponsorship, no affiliate links, no paid placements, and no relationship with any conference, organiser or submission platform.
No products are named. If any of that changes it will be stated here and on every affected page.