[Taxacom] [iczn-list] Systematic Entomology

Mon Jul 28 08:44:17 CDT 2014

John & al

The matter of the addition of page numbers is indeed one that the ICN
addressed. I should probably have emphasised Art. 30 Note 2 that reads:
Note　2.　　Content in external sources accessed via a hyperlink or URL
(Uniform Resource Locator) embedded in text is not part of the
publication; nor is associated information that does not form part of
the text itself, such as page numbers (if preliminary or lacking) or
watermarks. Content is that which stands alone as the version that the
publisher considers final (see Art. 30.2). 
Cheers,  John
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
John McNeill, Rapporteur-général, Nomenclature Section, XVIII IBC, 2011
Honorary Associate, Royal Botanic Garden, Edinburgh;
Director Emeritus, Royal Ontario Museum.
Mailing address: Royal Botanic Garden, Edinburgh, EH3 5LR, Scotland,
U.K.
Telephone: +44-131-248-2848; fax: +44-131-248-2901
Home office: +44-162-088-0651
e-mail: J.McNeill at rbge.ac.uk (mail to johnm at rom.on.ca is also read)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

>>> John Noyes  07/28/14 12:22 PM >>>
It is the definition of "final version" that is the problem. Publishers
regard the "version of record" as the final version. If the publishers
alter the pagination from that which appears in the prepublication to
that which actually appears in the ACTUAL final version can we consider
the prepublication as not being the final version or "version of
record". In the particular case that I mentioned the electronic article
has the following statement printed "[Version of Record, published
online 12 June 2014]" which means that the publisher intends it to be
the final version, but how can it be? - The final version will have
different pagination and the volume number of the journal will be added.
Semantics or not, it is very confusing!

John

John Noyes
Scientific Associate
Department of Life Sciences
Natural History Museum
Cromwell Road
South Kensington
London SW7 5BD
UK
jsn at nhm.ac.uk
Tel.: +44 (0) 207 942 5594
Fax.: +44 (0) 207 942 5229

Universal Chalcidoidea Database (everything you wanted to know about
chalcidoids and more):
www.nhm.ac.uk/chalcidoids

From: Raymond Hoser - The Snakeman [mailto:viper007 at live.com.au]
Sent: 28 July 2014 11:40
To: John Noyes; iczn-list at afriherp.org; taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
Subject: RE: [iczn-list] Systematic Entomology

My view is that it is probably NOT published according to the code
(based on what you have told me).

The final version I assume "will" be different to the one you are
reading and possibly published as hard copy.  Even if one typo is
corrected, or page numbers are added it makes the publication non
compliant according to article 8, which demands numerous identical
copies.
Take for example the recent pseudoscience of Messers Reynolds et al, who
renamed Broghammerus Hoser, 2004 with their own coined name.

Their first online pre-publication came out in 2013.  A corrected one
emerged a week or two later and then the final version (different again)
was published in 2014.

Even Wuster gang members divorced themselves from this effort.

My advice (and I am sure many commissioners would be the same) is don't
circulate more than one version of a taxonomic paper either before or at
time of publication, other than for REVIEW and clearly identified as
this.

If it means delaying proper publication of a paper somewhat, then so be
it.

Better to get it right the first time.

All the best

Snakebusters* - Australia's best reptiles*
The only hands-on reptiles* shows that lets people hold the animals*.
Reptile parties*, events, courses
Phones: 9812 3322
0412 777 211

________________________________
From: j.noyes at nhm.ac.uk
To: iczn-list at afriherp.org; taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2014 09:37:35 +0000
Subject: [iczn-list] Systematic Entomology
Dear All,

I recentl
y  was sent a prepublication ("EaBaur, H., et al. 2014 Morphometric analysis and taxonomic revision of
Anisopteromalus Ruschka (Hymenoptera: Chalcidoidea: Pteromalidae) - an
integrative approach. Systematic Entomology  DOI: 10.1111/syen.12081.

This electronic publication can be considered as valid according to
Article 8 of the ICZN dealing with electronic publications. Or can it?
On the face of it is complies with the Code in that it has been
registered with ZooBank and it has a publication date of 12 June 2012.

My doubt is that according to Articles 9.9 and 21.8.3 preliminary
versions of works accessible electronically in advance of publication
are not to be considered as published. It seems a sort of circular
argument here. Can this EarlyView version can be considered published
merely because it appears to comply with Article 8 or can it be
considered as unpublished because it is an advance version of the final
version (which will have volume and final pagination - both absent from
this version).

If it cannot be considered as published then I foresee no problem.
However, if it can be considered as published then it may be opening a
can of worms and I am wondering if there is any decent way of solving
the problem before it becomes general practice.

In my view such prepublications (if they are available) must be treated
as completely separate publications because they do not have IDENTICAL
volume and pagination to that of the final printed version or electronic
version. This in turn will making databasing for nomenclatural purposes
difficult because the pagination (at least) and lack of volume number
means that the publication in which a name (and other nomenclatural
acts) is made available originally has to be recorded as a DOI (not as a
volume number) and the page number as it appears in the prepub and not
the printed version. To say the least it is confusing because, in the
future, I can see two versions of effectively the same paper being
recorded as the primary source of a nomenclatural act whilst only the
prepub will be the correct one. Publishers regard these prepubs as a
temporary, earlier version of the final (printed) version of the paper
and thus will al most certainly not make effort to make them permanent
records in any way and so, in time, the primary source of a
nomenclatural act will be lost.

My thought is this. Is it really necessary to publish a prepublication
of a taxonomic paper? I think not - we taxonomists are not under the
same pressure as medics or particle physicists to publish first. So why
publish a prepub at all? From a taxonomic/nomenclatural point of view it
is pointless and very frustrating, especially for those of us that are
trying to maintain electronic taxonomic databases. Can we do something
about it before it is too late? I suspect that if these code compliant
prepubs are not abandoned now then many, many other journals are going
to follow suit making life difficult for us all.

Of course, it is likely that all journals will be eventually produced in
only electronic format but until that happens I think prepubs (that are
ICZN compliant) for taxonomic/systematic papers should be abandoned.

What are the views of others?

John

John Noyes
Scientific Associate
Department of Life Sciences
Natural History Museum
Cromwell Road
South Kensington
London SW7 5BD
UK
jsn at nhm.ac.uk
Tel.: +44 (0) 207 942 5594
Fax.: +44 (0) 207 942 5229

Universal Chalcidoidea Database (everything you wanted to know about
chalcidoids and more):
www.nhm.ac.uk/chalcidoids

From: iczn-list [mailto:iczn-list-bounces at afriherp.org] On Behalf Of
Raymond Hoser - The Snakeman
Sent: 17 July 2014 06:37
To: iczn-list at afriherp.org; taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
Subject: [iczn-list] Time to renounce ... Malayopython ... taxonomic
vandalism?

Dear all, nothing better epitomizes the taxonomic vandalism and misuse
of the zoological code than the Wuster gang's over-writing of the 10
year old established name Broghammerus with their own coined name
M
alayopython.
In spite of theiharassing of everyone to use their improper nomenclature, people are
resisting them.
As Wuster and Schleip post here regularly and they can see  from the
attached image (one of many) that their ill-conceived attack on the
nomenclature code is not having the unanimous support they allege ...
people still use the proper names, I ask them to formally and publicly
renounce their group's name Malayopython in order to create stability
for users of the taxonomy and nomenclature.
I note that the species involved, is a high conservation significance
animal.
..... here's waiting!
All the best

Snakebusters* - Australia's best reptiles*
The only hands-on reptiles* shows that lets people hold the animals*.
Reptile parties*, events, courses
Phones: 9812 3322
0412 777 211

_______________________________________________ iczn-list mailing list
iczn-list at afriherp.org
http://list.afriherp.org/mailman/listinfo/iczn-list
_______________________________________________
Taxacom Mailing List
Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at:
http://taxacom.markmail.org

Celebrating 27 years of Taxacom in 2014.