The Hindawi brand is gone. Thousands of papers were retracted. 19 journals were delisted from Web of Science. Here's what that means for your submission decision today.
If you are reading about Hindawi for the first time in 2026, you may not realise the brand technically no longer exists. Wiley retired the Hindawi name in 2024, folding the surviving journals into its main Wiley portfolio. But researchers still ask the question — is a journal that used to be published by Hindawi a safe submission target? — and the question is worth answering properly.
The short answer: some former Hindawi journals are now reasonable submission targets under Wiley's tightened editorial processes. Others have been delisted, closed, or remain reputationally damaged in ways that affect how your paper will be perceived even if it is formally accepted. This post walks through what happened, which journals were affected, and the practical question — are Hindawi journals 2026 safe? — with a clear framework for deciding.
The crisis was, by industry standards, unprecedented in scale. It exposed how paper mills had systematically infiltrated the Hindawi special-issue workflow — using compromised guest editors, fake peer reviewers, and fraudulent referee reports. Wiley's response was substantial: editorial processes were overhauled, AI screening tools were deployed, guest-editor verification was tightened, and the brand itself was discontinued.
As of 2026, the situation has stabilised but not reset. Roughly 200 former Hindawi journals continue to publish under the Wiley imprint, with significantly tightened peer-review processes. Some of these journals remain Scopus-indexed and Web of Science-indexed; some have regained indexing after temporary suspension; some are still flagged or delisted and may or may not recover.
The practical question for a researcher considering one of these journals is not "was this journal involved in the retraction crisis?" — because the answer for most is some version of yes. The practical question is "is this specific journal, today, under current Wiley editorial processes, a credible place for my paper?"
Former Hindawi journals no longer carry the Hindawi name. They now appear as Wiley journals on the wileyonlinelibrary.com platform. This means a paper you publish there will cite "Wiley" as the publisher — but the journal's reviewing reputation still carries history that some reviewers and committees remember.
When evaluating any former Hindawi journal, work through these signals before deciding to submit.
This depends heavily on what your paper needs from a publisher and what your institution will recognise. There are three situations to consider.
If a former Hindawi journal is currently indexed in both databases, currently shows no recent mass-retraction activity, and is operating under full Wiley editorial controls, it is functionally a Wiley journal. For the purposes of most university publication requirements, a paper there will count. The practical concern is only reputational — some senior colleagues or reviewers will remember the Hindawi lineage, which may affect citation or perception.
If a journal was among the 19 delisted in 2023 and has not regained indexing, do not submit. The paper will not count for indexed-journal requirements, and publishing there now signals that you either did not check current indexing or chose to ignore it. Neither is good.
Some journals sit in an unstable position — indexed in one database but not the other, or recently reinstated after a flag. This is the case where verification matters most. Check Scopus Source List and the Web of Science Master Journal List on the day you are considering submission, and re-verify after acceptance but before paying any APC.
For any former Hindawi journal, verify indexing status twice: once before submission, and once before paying the APC. Indexing can change between these two moments. If the journal is delisted while your paper is in review, the paper may not count for your institution's requirements even if accepted.
The Hindawi crisis is not just a Hindawi story. It is a special-issue paper-mill story, and the same pattern has appeared — at smaller scale — at other large open-access publishers. Any journal that relies heavily on externally-invited special-issue guest editors is structurally vulnerable to the same failure mode. This applies to parts of the MDPI portfolio and to Frontiers, which we discuss in our MDPI assessment and Frontiers assessment.
The practical defence is the same across all of them: verify current indexing at submission time, check the specific special issue's guest editor, read recent articles from the journal for quality signal, and ensure your institution does not have an internal list against the publisher. For the full framework on spotting journal risks, see our pillar guide on how to identify predatory journals.
Former Hindawi journals sit on a spectrum in 2026 — some are legitimate indexed Wiley journals you can submit to with reasonable confidence, others are delisted legacy titles that will not count for your institution, and a third group sits in an unstable middle that demands verification at submission time. The brand is retired, but the reputational residue is real. Do the verification, ask a senior colleague about local perception, and then decide.
No publisher is ever safe in the abstract. Journals are safe in the specific — a specific title, at a specific time, with specific current indexing. Build the verification habit now; it is the single most protective submission practice we can recommend.
Verify a specific former Hindawi journal. Current Scopus and WoS indexing, quartile, and delisting history — in under a minute.
Check a Journal →Considering a former Hindawi journal for a specific paper? Book a free 30-minute consultation with a PhD editor.
Book Free Call →