Editorial standard

What this page is for

A directory is only worth reading if you know how things got into it. This page is the whole rule set. It is deliberately specific, so you can hold us to it — and so you can tell when we have got something wrong.

What gets listed

We list recurring conference series, not one-off events. If a meeting has run at least twice and intends to run again, it is a candidate. Each series gets one page, and every edition of it lives on that page.

Before a series is published we check, in order:

1. Who organises it. A named learned society, university, government body or company — not an unattributed “organising committee” with no legal entity behind it.
2. How long it has run. First year held, and whether the run is continuous.
3. Where the proceedings go. Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed, IEEE, a named journal, or nowhere. “Nowhere” is a perfectly respectable answer and we say it plainly.
4. Whether peer review is described in public. Not whether it is rigorous — we cannot audit that — but whether the organiser is willing to tell you how it works.
5. Whether the fee structure is disclosed before submission.

What “verified” means

It means a person opened the organiser’s own page, read the date printed there, and recorded both the URL they read it on and the date they read it. Both appear on the listing.

It does not mean we guarantee the date. Organisers move deadlines, sometimes without announcement. That is exactly why we show you when we last looked, so you can judge how much to trust it and click through to the source if the stakes are high.

Every open deadline is re-checked at least monthly. A listing that has not been checked in over 90 days loses its verified status until someone looks again.

When we flag a series

A flag is not an accusation of fraud. It is a statement of a checkable fact that we think you would want to know before submitting. Typical reasons:

• The organiser’s identity or legal entity cannot be established.
• Acceptance is offered before any described review process could plausibly have happened.
• The scope is so broad that no coherent programme committee could cover it.
• Fees are not disclosed until after acceptance.
• Named committee members have publicly stated they are listed without consent.

Where a series is flagged, the specific reason is printed on its page. We state the fact, never a characterisation. If an organiser corrects the underlying issue, the flag comes off.

What money can and cannot buy

Listings are free, and always will be. An Enhanced listing is a paid upgrade that buys presentation: a logo, images, a video, a direct registration button, and a clearly labelled Featured slot on its discipline page.

It buys nothing else. It cannot change editorial ordering, it cannot change credibility status, it cannot change or remove the editorial note, and it cannot remove a flag. Anyone who offers us money for those things will be told what is on this page.

Where we earn a referral fee from a software vendor, that is disclosed on the page it appears on. Referral relationships never affect a review’s conclusion, and no vendor sees a review before it is published.

If you think we are wrong

Tell us. Wrong dates, wrong indexing status, an unfair flag, a series we have missed — all of it goes through the same route, and all of it gets a reply. See Corrections.

Changes to this standard

If we change these rules, we will say what changed and when. A standard you can quietly rewrite is not a standard.

Last updated 22 August 2026.