Based on its perceived objectivity, Scopus and Web of Science (WoS) have been largely considered as sources of journal authority. However, its status has recently been contested due to its linguistic, geographical, and disciplinary biases. This paper studies journal quality and journal representation, focusing on the African publishing environment. It compares three academic data sources: two international indexes--Scopus and WoS--, and a regional journal indexing platform--African Journals Online (AJOL). First, it revises and compares the quality criteria of the three sources to explore the similarities and differences among them. Then, the paper develops a methodology to compare journal coverage of the three data sources in terms of countries, research areas, and language. The results show the importance of implementing a situated notion of research quality and the existing biases of mainstream and alternative academic sources toward specific countries, research areas, and languages. The findings also contribute to the ongoing conversation about diversity and inclusion in science and can be used to assess the limitations of our current bibliometric analysis.