Let's look at a journal and walk through the process of evaluating it according to LMU's checklist for identifying predatory journals. We'll use the International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Engineering & Technology (IJARCET).

1. Web Search
The first criteria is a web search for the journal. If we type in the actual title of the journal, it is the first result. We’ll give the journal 3 points.
2. Journal Name
Next: could the journal name be confused with another journal? Let’s type in some of the keywords in a Google search. There is at least one journal - Journal of Computer Science and Technology - from a reputable publisher, Springer, that has a very similar title. We’ll give the journal 2 points for having a similar but distinguishable title.

3. Editorial Board
The next criteria is the editorial board. We can find this information by clicking “Editorial Board” on the IJARCET website. The list of editors includes each one’s name and institutional affiliation. However let’s also note that almost all of the editors are based in India, even though the journal claims to be “international” in its title. Since the title doesn’t match the geography of the editors, let’s give this journal only 2 points for its editorial board.

4. Review Process
Next up is the review process. In the first paragraph of the homepage, the journal is described as “peer-reviewed.” However, nowhere on the website describes the review process or provides any evidence that it is actually peer reviewed. So, we’ll give the journal 2 points for the peer review process.

5. Conflicts of Interest
Next: Does the journal state conflicts of interest? There’s nothing on the website that address conflicts of interest at all, so we’ll give the journal 1 point.
6. Journal Website
The journal’s website itself is the next item on the list. The website is farily easy to navigate, but there is some missing information, as we just saw when looking for the conflicts of interest. Also, the bottom of the website tells us that the site is managed by Wordpress, a free website builder. We would expect a scholarly journal to have a website created by a professional web designer, so we will give this journal 1 point for the website.
7. Revenue Sources
Next up is revenue sources, so we will look around the journal website for information about its business model. We want to find things like subscription or author fees or sponsorship. The publication fee page tells us the authors must pay an online maintenance charge, which is different for authors in India than for authors in other countries. The details about the full business model are sparse, and it is again suspicious for a journal that calls itself international to place a priority on a specific country. We’ll give IJARCET 2 points.

8. Journal Archive
The next item of interest is the journal archive. IJARCET includes an archive of issues with each article available to download in PDF format. However, we can see gaps in the issues, like issues 8 and 9 from volume 9 are not available. We will give it 2 points for that.
9. Publishing Schedule
The publishing schedule can be determined from looking at the list of archived issues on the left side of the screen, but the publishing schedule is not specifically stated. Also, we can see that some of the issues from 2020 are missing. Finally, the top of the website says they are calling for papers for the December 2020 issue, which has already passed. This indicates that the journal doesn’t consistently publish issues and may not have enough submissions to publish. We’ll give the journal 1 point.

10. Author Fees
The author fees are clearly stated on the Publication Fee page, so the journal gets 3 points for that criteria.
11. Copyright Information
The next criteria is copyright Information. There is no statement about copyright on the website, even though the journal says it is open access. Most open acces journals will state that the articles are under a Creative Commons license. We’ll give the journal 1 point.
12. Journal Index
Next, we look at the journal indexing. Good journals are indexed in databases like Web of Science, ATLA, or Academic Search, and will state where they are indexed on their websites. This journal states that it’s indexed on Bing, Yahoo, Google, and Academia.edu. None of these are scholarly databases, so we’ll give the journal 1 point for that. 
13. Access to Journal Articles
Access to journal articles is the next criteria, and we can easily access full text articles from the journal’s archives, so we will give it 3 points.
14. Number of Articles Published
For number of articles published, we can tell the journal has a pretty long publication history the includes more than 10 articles. However, if we look at issues from early years like 2014, those issues had a lot of articles. The most recent issue from July 2020, which is a year ago, only includes one article and still has a note that more papers from that issue will be available soon. Since one article in an issue is not enough for a standard journal, let’s give the journal 1 point.

15. Web Search for Publisher & 16. Publisher Information
Now we move onto evaluating the publisher. There is no information about the publisher on this website. Normally publisher information would be found at least in the footer at the bottom of the page, but this website only includes the title of the journal and states that it’s powered by WordPress. Since we can’t do a search for an unknown publisher, we’ll give the journal 0 points for web search for the publisher and 1 point for publisher information, since there’s no information available.

Total
This adds up to a rating of 26, which the guide would call poor. It’s a good idea to avoid citing articles from this journal, because it does not display the rigorous standards of scholarship that are expected for academic work. Ideally, a journal would get 3 points in every category.