"Times Higher Education will now use Elsevier's Scopus data for its rankings because of its breadth and depth which provides a more complete view of the world of research", see the link below.

https://www.elsevier.com/authors-update/story/impact-metrics/times-higher-education-to-partner-with-elsevier-on-the-world-university-rankings

Hello Artur,

Do you believe that the Scopus journals are all quality journals? If you check the Scopus considered SJR rankings, there are some journals from my country become Q2 journals. see here.

http://www.scimagojr.com/journalsearch.php?q=18200156709&tip=sid&clean=0

if this journal is Q2, then what about some great journals really have rigorous peer reviewing process? I really cannot accept the scopus accepting formula for journals as compare to ISI.

nc

Personally, I prefer Scopus to ISI Web of Science. The coverage for conferences is much better in Scopus, whereas some of the major conferences in my field (applied mathematics/engineering) are irregularly or even not covered in ISI.

Professionally, any publication requires rigorous peer review, otherwise the quality and improvement  in the respective filed will not be achieved. If today we say scopus is good because of moderate tolerance, then one day in future, somebody will say google scholar is musch better than any other because there wont be any peer reviewing process at all. So it is not wise to ignore ISI as scopus still not very clear about the criteria for selection. So I would say ISI is best of best, while limiting excessive publications and also incorrect documents for the upcoming years. 

Dear Nachi Mani Charde,

You have misunderstood me. When I speak of major conferences in my field, I mean peer-reviewed conferences with widely available proceedings (eg IEEE Conference on Decision and Control).  A fair number of these conference papers meet the standards of  short papers (ie 6 pages) in top ISI journals in the same field, and are indeed later the basis of such short papers or of full papers in an extended version.  Some journals (eg IEEE Transactions on Industry Applications) don't accept a submission if a version of it has not been already published in an IAS-sponsored conference. In some areas (eg Computer Science) some top conferences are more valued than journals.  That is why a good coverage of (good) conferences matters, and why I prefer Scopus to ISI.

Dear Philippe Martin,

I appreciate your concerns but you failed to notice one important thing in publishing papers. Moreover, I, myself, have come across similar situation that you mentioned in your reply. In order to understand the impact between conference and journal publishing is that the conference proceedings publishes paper to extremely low number of experts in your field. So, only outstanding papers will then be considered to reproduce in journal for global assessment. Based on your research work in peer reviewed journal, fellow researcher or simply the peers may write review or relevant commentary when repeat your works.  It is premature to conclude that all conference papers are the highest best as they present it to audience of small group. Also, it is not wise to say that all journal publications are utterly good as some theories break all the conventional ideas that produced in journals. As to distinguish the best from better or even from the poor, any publication requires rigorous  peer review from highest level of proficiency. Otherwise similar results can be simultaneously produced by many researchers, which is really a waste of time. With this concepts in my, ISI  Web of Science covers breakthrough for betterment. Not simply an experimental results. To what extend the scopus ensures this is million dollar quest as I have 25 publication in scopus.

Nachi, this may be of interest to you and your readers, which may offer some clues to your qeury:

https://www.researchgate.net/post/Elsevier_and_the_expanding_metrics_and_or_open_access_culture_in_academics_quo_vadis