thesis publications

[Curtis Clark]

At 09:00 PM 02/28/97 -0700, JOSEPH E. LAFERRIERE wrote:
>Article  30.5.   Inclusion  of   new   names   or   neo-   or
>lectotypifications in a thesis or dissertation required to be
>written as  part of  a degree  program at  an institution  of
>higher education  is considered  effective publication if and
>only if  1) The  degree program  was completed  on or after 1
>January 2000; 2) The thesis or dissertation is made available
>by sale,  trade, or gift to people at institutions other than
>that at  which the  degree was awarded, whether by electronic
>publication, microfilm  xerography, or more traditional means
>of dissemination;  and 3) All other requirements of this Code
>are met.  For purposes  of priority, effective publication is
>dated from  the day the thesis or dissertation was officially
>accepted at the author's institution.

Sorry, but I don't buy this. How will it help systematics if protologues
don't already exist in major libraries, but have to be ordered? (At my
library, even faxes of articles in journals we don't have are free, but I'd
have to pay for a dissertation fiche myself.) How will it help systematics
if PhD students avoid putting new names in their theses, or avoid
nomenclature altogether, so that they can have some *refereed* publications
when they are out competing for jobs? I think the solution is to explicitly
exclude copies of official theses and dissertations, no matter how they are
distributed.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Curtis Clark                       http://www.is.csupomona.edu/~jcclark/
Biological Sciences Department                     Voice: (909) 869-4062
California State Polytechnic University, Pomona    FAX:   (909) 869-4078
Pomona CA 91768-4032  USA                          jcclark at csupomona.edu