[Taxacom] describing new species

[Michael Wilson]

Colleagues

To (partly) address Neal's comment. To me it remains essential to
describe new species as part of a revision of a group. But some seem
to prioritise and celebrate the description of 'new species' over the
recognition of 'known' species. How many places in the world are you
able to identify 'common' species in many groups without special
expertise and knowledge of the literature? Would the Journal that
rejected Chris's paper publish a paper in which a key to say 20 known
species was given that made life easier for users- or is that not
considered science now?  A colleague did say to me some time ago- if
you make taxonomy too easy for others to use we won't have jobs... but
that's another issue.

Mike Wilson

National Museum of Wales, Cardiff, UK