Saturday, 14 February 2026

A research article’s digital cul-de-sac. How to fix an academic paper that is hidden and/or unreachable

Written for researchers keen to understand potential obstacles to their articles not being readily searchable via academic indexes and search engines thanks to broken linkages, a metadata mismatch or non-submission. Updated- 18 Feb

Most researchers are keen for their works to be well-indexed, quick-to-find, and reliably linked to their academic publisher’s landing page from search engine results. This is especially true for scholars whose performance reviews include consideration of their works’ impact in reaching interested readers. Such impact scores can include citations, amplification and readership, as tracked via altmetrics and/or other sources.

This post provides an example to illustrate why a research author should not assume that every article of theirs will be properly indexed. As result, this work may not be seen by potentially interested parties searching for pertinent work with salient keywords, despite the work's merits. Metadata mismatches and broken linkages can unwittingly emerge during academic publishing, and may persist if not checked and corrected. This post gives helpful advice for correcting a few key problems, sharing the practical example of errors that impacted a South African journal article's availability after its digital publication on the 1st of December, 2025:

'Brandjacked for social media advert fraud'- a ghost in the fog... 

The first publication from a research project that began in 2021, Brandjacked for social media advert fraud: Microcelebrities' experiences of digital crime, was published in the Acta Criminologica: African Journal of Criminology & Victimology journal. Ordinarily, new articles should only take a few weeks after being indexed by an an academic metadata aggregator such as CrossRef before they appear on their authors' academic profiles (CrossRef can update researchers' ORCID and Google Scholar records), followed by listings on academic social networks. These may be preceded by results in search engines and in Artificial Intelligence results (such as Grok). While search results for Brandjacked were quickly available from the last two, it could not be found under any of the former by February, 2026. This post explores such challenges, the root cause of the article not being be properly indexed for academic searches, plus work-arounds Brandjacked authors had to follow. While their paper technically existed, it could not efficiently be shared online by its four authors, and some listing results deafaulted to a 'page not found' error message, rather than the publisher's article landing page:

Multiple URLs as expected

A normal part of the academic publishing process sees several URLs being created for a particular publication. In Brandjacked's case, these are from the handle.net  domain (pointing to https://hdl.handle.net/10520/ejc-crim_v38_n3_a2) and journals.co.za's (onto https://journals.co.za/doi/10.10520/ejc-crim_v38_n3_a2). Sabinet African Journals (journals.co.za) is a searchable platform providing a comprehensive, full-text collection for over 600 African-published electronic journals. Handle.net is developed by the Corporation for National Research Initiatives (CNRI) to support a distributed information system for persistent, unique, and actionable identifiers (handles) for digital objects over the internet.  The Handle System is the underlying technology used by the Digital Object Identifier (DOI) system for identifying content, particularly for digital publishing and commerce.

Brandjacked's DOI value changed post-publication

A DOI is a unique, permanent alphanumeric string that is assigned to digital objects. DOIs include a prefix always starting with 10 and a suffix, separated by a forward slash (/). Prefacing the DOI with doi.org creates an actionable link. Originally, the brandjacked article was allocated the DOI 10.10520/ejc-crim_v2025_nse1_a2. However, this was subsequently changed to 10.10520/ejc-crim_v38_n3_a2, reflecting the article’s publication as the second in the 38th volume’s third issue. Commonly linked to journal articles, books, and research datasets, each DOI should provide a stable, long-lasting link to a research output’s internet location, regardless of whether its online address [or Uniform Research Location (URL)] gets changed.

Social media shares…

On social media, academics, researchers and scholars typically share the DOI version of URLs, since a DOI's usage is the primary identifier for tracking comments and mentions via altmetrics. Attention for academic publications is typically sparse, with most not being shared via social media, and a significant portion only being shared once via popular platforms. Only a few papers, often with high public interest or "quirky" topics, receive the vast majority of shares. To help Brandjacked's visibility, I wrote a 31 tweet long thread at x.com/travisnoakes/status/2001585342000898177, shared a LinkedIn post at linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7407406366052569089/, and wrote this public Facebook post at facebook.com/share/p/1BtsXaJtQC/.

… but no AltMetrics listing yet

On the Brandjacked article’s landing page, the altmetrics badge only shows a question mark at the date of this post's publication (see Figure 1 below).

No AltMetrics listing for Brandjacked article.png
Figure 1. Screenshot of No AltMetrics listing for Brandjacked article,12 Feb 2026. 


Nor are results for the Brandjacked article are shown on app.dimensions.ai/discover/publication?search_mode (see Figure 2).

No AltMetrics listing for Brandjacked article

Figure 2. Screenshot of No AltMetrics listing for Brandjacked article,
12 Feb 2026. 


As a research blogger, I like to share Altmetrics badges for my publications, but none is available for Branjacked via badge.dimensions.ai/details/doi/10.10520/ejc-crim_v38_n3_a2?domain=https://journals.co.za (see Figure 3).

No auto article updates to ORCID profiles

Each of Brandjacked’s four authors have an Open Researcher and Contributor ID (ORCID) address. This is a 16-digit persistent digital identifier (e.g., 0000-0001-9566-8983) that uniquely identifies research-contributors all over the world. Like the DOI value does for research outputs, ORCID resolves name ambiguity. It links all research publications, datasets, and grants to an individual, regardless if their name or institution changes. Authors can set their ORCID profile to be automatically updated with research outputs that are linked to them. As of this post’s date of publication, the Brandjacked article was not linked from any of the authors’ ORCID profiles.

Google Scholar links to a 404 error

The academic search engine, Google Scholar, is popular due to offering the widest automatic global indexing of scholars' works. In its case, Google Scholar account holders can create manual entries for their articles, or select pre-existing records featuring their author name. In Brandjacked’s case, I created a manual record in late December, since no record for this paper was available for selection (Figure 3). Since then, Google Scholar has come to list two versions of the article. 

Two versions on Google Scholar
Figure 3.Screenshot of Two versions of Brandjacked on Google Scholar, 12 Feb 2026.

The top version, which can be Saved and Cited, produced a '404 not found' error when clicked through to Acta Criminologica (Figure 4).

DOI not resolved from Google Scholar
Figure 4.Screenshot of DOI not resolved from Google Scholar, 12 Feb 2026.

Thinking that this may have been caused by the manual record I created featuring the initial DOI, I chose to delete the article from my record. Then went into Google Scholar trash and selected ‘Delete Forever’. However, the article available for manual selection (Figure 5) still links to a '404 not found' result.

Figure 5. Screenshot of Google Scholar manual selection of Brandjacked, 12 Feb 2026.

Report a failed DOI link via doi.org

A manual entry created on ResearchGate (at  researchgate.net/publication/398814505_Brandjacked_for_social_media_advert_fraud_Microcelebrities'_experiences_of_digital_crime_in_South_Africa) lists the correct DOI (Figure 6), but it also showed a '404 not found' error when attempting to link to the digital publication.

ResearchGate DOI is correct.png
Figure 6.Screenshot of ResearchGate DOI being correct for Brandjacked, 12 Feb 2026.


At least this page presented an option to report the failed DOI. So, I submitted this error report to DOI: "The article 'Brandjacked for social media advert fraud' should be available at this DOI. Related working URLs are: https://journals.co.za/doi/10.10520/ejc-crim_v38_n3_a2 & https://hdl.handle.net/10520/ejc-crim_v38_n3_a2. Thanks in advance for fixing this."

DOI error report for Brandjacked 12 Feb 2026
Figure 7. Screenshot of DOI error report for Brandjacked, 12 Feb 2026.

As a shortcut for checking-and-reporting DOI errors, authors should open www.doi.org, then scroll down to the 'Try resolving a DOI name' section. There they can enter a DOI value to check it, and report a DOI URL address that fails in throwing a '404 not found' error.  

DOI Prefix [10.10520] Not Found.png
Figure 8. Screenshot showing DOI Prefix 10.10520 Not Found error message, 12 Feb 2026.


Just a few downloads...

Acta Criminologica’s ‘Open Access’ policy initially provides restricted access via the South African Bibliographic and Information Network (SABINET)'s archives. These are available via university libraries’ annual SABINET subscription for SABINET African Electronic Publications (SA_ePublications). There is a 12-month open access embargo from the date of publication/loading on
the Criminological Society of Africa (CRIMSA)’s website. Perhaps being published before the Christmas holidays in an access restricted format contributed to Brandjacked only being downloaded five times in the first two months. But even achieving that readership is not been helped by a ghost-listing amidst a heavy stream of academic publications. As Trend MD reports, nearly 8,000 research articles are published everyday. In this flood of articles, the visibility of our niche publication is not helped by being poorly indexed. Consequently, it is vital to work with the journal, their publisher, and one's co-authors to work around and, hopefully remedy any root causes of the problem.

Email the editor

Given that the landing page URL is throwing a '404 not found' error and the DOI is not resolving, it seems likely that the error is a flaw on the publisher's end. I have written to the journal's editor to request that the CrossRef metadata is updated. Hopefully, the journal’s production team can soon ensure that: (i) the landing page URL for the article is correctly mapped to its DOI. And that (ii) the metadata provided to CrossRef and other aggregators is updated to reflect a functional DOI link. I did flag that this issue impacts other articles in the Cybercrime special issue, so it's crucial to fix for all its authors’ benefit, too.

Subsequent investigation spotlighted that this error applies to all articles in the journal: prior to 2017, the 'Acta Criminologica: African Journal of Criminology & Victimology' journal was known as 'Acta Criminologica: Southern African Journal of Criminology'. Its first issue started in 1988, and entering its first ever article's DOI produces exactly the same error as shown in Figure 8.

Feedback from the publisher 

A product manager for content services at SABINET replied to the editor that the DOI link is not working as the journal is not using registered DOIs yet. The 10.10520 prefix is a "dummy" DOI that SABINET uses to ingest content. By contrast, the persistent link to resolve each article is its https://hdl.handle.net address.

The product manager offered to reach out to the Google Scholar team to ask that they use the handle link rather than the DOI code, unless they use the complete URL. She also flagged that the DOI issue can only be addressed for future Acta Criminologica articles once their allocated actual DOIs are registered with Crossref.

A manual ORCID listing

As one cannot select a handle.net address to automatically link an article to one's ORCID profile, I created a manual record for Brandjacked. This manual entry route provided an option to define both the DOI's 'identifier value' (10520/ejc-crim_v38_n3_a2) and the full identifier URL's address (https://hdl.handle.net/10520/ejc-crim_v38_n3_a2) (Figure 9). I asked my co-authors to add this manuscript to their ORCID records, which correctly resolves to the publisher's article landing page.

Applying the handle.net identified in manual ORCID listing.png
Figure 9. Screenshot of applying the handle.net identified in manual ORCID listing, 16 Feb 2026.

However, each author was unable to select this listing for automatic addition, despite entering the assigned DOI index number, the full handle.net address (Figure 10) or the journal's URL.

handle.net URL does not work for co-author selection
Figure 10. Screenshot showing handle.net URL does not work for co-author selection via ORCID, 16 Feb 2026.

Instead, I shared a screengrab of the details I used. Each author manually copied these for adding the same details in Figure 11.

Screengrab of manual ORCID entry for co-authors to copy
Figure 11. Screengrab of manual ORCID entry for co-authors to copy, 16 Feb 2026.

Using the same DOI and handle.net address should ensure that just one record is captured via ORCID, rather than creating a duplicate record for all four co-authors.

A manual Academia.edu entry

Like ORCID, Academia.edu's manual field entries for an article support both the entry of the DOI value, and also related Links/URL (Figure 12). This contrasts to ResearchGate's support for just one DOI address.

Add handle.net entry to manual Academia.edu record.png
Figure 12. Screenshot of adding handle.net entry to manual Academia.edu record, 16 Feb 2026.

No Kudos (addition)

Kudos is a networking platform designed to increase the visibility, reach, and impact of published research It supports scholars with explaining their work in plain language, and adding salient context. In theory, a DOI, article title or recent manual entry on ORCID should support Kudos with finding 'Brandjacked for social media advert fraud'. However, none such searches work (Figure 13).

Screenshot of Kudos DOI text search ORCID search option
Figure 13. Screenshot of Kudos search options - DOI, text search & ORCID, 16 Feb 2026. 



Conclusion

After overcoming the challenges of review, revisions, and achieving a digital publication, academic authors may face a new challenge- following up that their publications are well-indexed. This should not be assumed, rather authors should check that (i) the DOI identifier does link to their article publication page. And that their paper's social media impact and amplification is reflected correctly via that page's Altmetrics badge.

If there is a problem, it is most likely to be taking place in the earliest phase of the Research Data Lifecycle (RDLC)- this broad concept is used to describe the "cradle-to-grave" journey of research data:
In terms of sharing research outputs, it includes curation of metadata that is standardised, ensuring outputs are both disseminated, and findable via academic search engine optimisation (ASEO). And that the article's reach, amplification and media interest can be measured via altmetrics.

In the case of our article, the DOI flaw lay in phase 1 of output sharing. The journal does not supply metadata for its articles to the academic metadata aggregator, CrossRef. Instead, the journal's publisher setup a temporary DOI as a workaround. While this may work as a stopgap measure, it poses a major obstacle for scholars keen to share the work in phase 2 with centralised registries, since each co-author must manually create an ORCID record. In phase 3, academic aggregators (such as Google Scholar) may direct users to a 'page not found' response on doi.org or from the journal's website. In phase 4, researchers may face a similar problem on academic social networks (such as ResearchGate) which require an accurate DOI link. For phase 5, the ability of Altmetrics services to track an article's amplification, reach and media interest seems scuppered, while its citations are tracked.

The academic journal plans to submit CrossRef references in the near future. In interim, the co-authors made work-arounds to address the placeholder DOI index information in phases 2 to 4. These included listing their article's and/or handle.net address in manual entries on ORCID's centralised registry, academic aggregators (e.g. Google Scholar or Bielefeld Academic Search Engine), and shifted to using handle.net address in academic social network posts. I have encouraged Acta Criminologica's editor to organise that its full archive becomes retroactively registered with Crossref, too. The estimated cost of $0.15 per article’s uploaded meta-data should hopefully not prove showstopper, and supplying the correct metadata will hold many benefits for both the journal and its authors.

N.B. Kindly add a comment below if you have any related suggestions or other feedback...

All pageviews since 2008 =

+ TRANSLATE

> Translate posts into your preferred language

+ SEARCH

> Search travisnoakes.co.za

+ or search by labels (keywords)

research (61) education (43) design (23) nvivo (16) multimodal (9) visual culture (4)

+ or search blogposts by date

Past year's popular posts

+ FOLLOW

Followers

+ RELATED ONLINE PRESENCES

> Tweets

> Kudos

> ResearchGate profile
Articles + chapters

> Web of Science


> Create With Blurb bookstore
ALIEN Broken Covenants

> Create With Pinterest