Diethard Tautz and Paul Rainey propose criteria for journal quality entirely apart from citation impact and reputation. While you think over their proposal, don't overlook their case for some of the ways we'd benefit from having good criteria (no matter who first proposed them):
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1038/s44319-025-00649-5
1. They could help us assess the justification for "public payments for journal services, such as #OpenAccess fees" or #APCs.
2. They could help "immunize against the predatory and fraudulent practices that are currently threatening the scientific publication system."
3. They could help funders "finance journals according to the Diamond open-access [#DiamondOA] standards as a basic infrastructure for science."
