[Taxacom] two names online published - one new species
Michael A. Ivie
mivie at montana.edu
Fri Jan 22 16:54:18 CST 2016
It ("similarly") applies to the appointment to the positions. After the
matter of appointment is finished, the mater of employment is taken up,
and restricted to the E.S. Read what it says, not what you want it to
say. Also, the E.S. "may be an employee" of the Trust, which no longer
exists. Luckily, there are other appropriate bodies, such as the
University of Singapore!
On 1/22/2016 3:39 PM, Stephen Thorpe wrote:
> Well, use of the word "similarly", suggests that what applies to one applies equally to the other (in the context of Art. 9). Why else is that word there?
>
> --------------------------------------------
> On Sat, 23/1/16, Michael A. Ivie <mivie at montana.edu> wrote:
>
> Subject: Re: [Taxacom] two names online published - one new species
> To: "Stephen Thorpe" <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>, taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> Received: Saturday, 23 January, 2016, 11:29 AM
>
> He is NOT the Executive Secretary, he
> is the Secretary-General! Two
> different positions, no provision for employment is made for
> the S-G.
> You nitpick on everything anyone else says, try to keep up
> on what you
> say. Also, there does not seem to be any conflict of
> interest
> definition for the ICZN, so that would presumably not apply
> anyway.
>
> On 1/22/2016 3:20 PM, Stephen Thorpe wrote:
> > "The Executive Secretary may be an employee of an
> appropriate body, such as the International Trust for
> Zoological Nomenclature"
> >
> > One might question the appropriateness of an Executive
> Secretary being the owner of a commercial publishing house
> whose published output is subject to regulation by the
> International Code of Zoological Nomenclature!
> >
> > Stephen
> >
> > --------------------------------------------
> > On Sat, 23/1/16, Michael A. Ivie <mivie at montana.edu>
> wrote:
> >
> > Subject: Re: [Taxacom] two names
> online published - one new species
> > To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> > Received: Saturday, 23 January, 2016,
> 10:49 AM
> >
> > Oops, looked at the wrong
> > constitution, ITZN, not ICZN.
> There is a
> > Secretary-General possible, but the
> position has no duties
> > specified,
> > and certainly is not head of
> anything.
> >
> > "Article 9. Secretariat. The
> Council may appoint an
> > Executive Secretary
> > for such a term and with such duties
> as may be fixed in the
> > Bylaws; a
> > member of the Commission may be
> appointed similarly as
> > Secretary-General. The Executive
> Secretary may be an
> > employee of an
> > appropriate body, such as the
> International Trust for
> > Zoological
> > Nomenclature."
> >
> > Mike
> >
> > On 1/22/2016 2:32 PM, Michael A. Ivie
> wrote:
> > > Well, actually, if you consult
> the Constitution and
> > By-Laws of the
> > > ICZN there is no such thing as a
> Secretary-General, so
> > a person with
> > > that title cannot actually be
> head of anything.
> > Stephen, don't
> > > believe everything you read on
> the internet!.
> > >
> > > Mike
> > >
> > > On 1/22/2016 2:29 PM, Stephen
> Thorpe wrote:
> > >> Well, the article I linked to
> states [quote]One of
> > his top priorities
> > >> in his new job would be to
> ensure the
> > commission’s long term
> > >> viability[unquote]
> > >>
> > >> So, what does the president
> do, then?
> > >>
> > >> It is really splitting hairs
> to criticize my use of
> > the vague term
> > >> "head of"! It is near enough
> to make my point.
> > >>
> > >> Stephen
> > >>
> > >>
> --------------------------------------------
> > >> On Sat, 23/1/16, Michael A.
> Ivie <mivie at montana.edu>
> > wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Subject: Re:
> [Taxacom] two names
> > online published - one new species
> > >> To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> > >> Received:
> Saturday, 23 January,
> > 2016, 10:10 AM
> > >> Isn't
> the head of the ICZN
> > a
> > >> President?
> Did someone
> > change the By-Laws?
> > >> On
> 1/22/2016 2:03 PM,
> > Stephen Thorpe wrote:
> > >> > Rich,
> > >> >
> > >> > I'm
> going to have to reply to
> > some of your comments
> > >> individually.
> Firstly:
> > >> >
> > >> >>
> Finally, can you
> > elaborate on what you mean by this
> > >> statement:
> > >> >>
> "BTW, congrats to Z.-Q.
> > Zhang on his recent
> > >> appointment
> as head of the ICZN"
> > >> >> ?
> > >> > This is
> what I mean:
> > >> http://www.landcareresearch.co.nz/about/news/snippets/researcher-in-nz-first
> > >> >
> > >> > Looks
> like I do know
> > something that you don't! :)
> > >> >
> > >> >
> Stephen
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > --------------------------------------------
> > >> > On Sat,
> 23/1/16, Richard Pyle
> > <deepreef at bishopmuseum.org>
> > >> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > Subject:
> RE:
> > [Taxacom] two names
> > >> online
> published - one new
> > species
> > >> > To:
> > "'Stephen Thorpe'" <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>,
> > >> taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu,
> > >> "'engel'"
> <msengel at ku.edu>,
> > >> "'Doug
> Yanega'" <dyanega at ucr.edu>
> > >> > Received:
> > Saturday, 23 January, 2016,
> > >> 9:55 AM
> > >> >
> > >> > Hi
> Stephen,
> > >> >
> > >> > Let
> me
> > clarify... I scale the
> > >> > magnitude
> of
> > the issue using a
> > >> baseline of
> paper-based
> > >> > publications
> > and/or the situation as
> > >> it existed
> prior to the
> > >> > amendment
> > for electronic
> > >> publication.
> I often see
> > lots of
> > >> > frantic
> > arm-waving and other forms of
> > >> virtual
> panic about
> > >> > one
> crisis
> > or another related to
> > >> electronic
> publication.
> > >> > To
> be sure,
> > there are some new
> > >> problems
> that have been
> > >> > introduced
> > with the Amendment, and
> > >> CERTAINLY
> the Amendment
> > >> > did
> not
> > solve all of the problems that
> > >> existed
> before it
> > >> > (nor
> could
> > it have). As Doug has
> > >> already
> alluded to, the
> > >> > Amendment
> > represents a compromise
> > >> between many
> different
> > >> > possible
> > approaches, and ultimately
> > >> reflects the
> best
> > >> > consensus
> of
> > the community at the
> > >> time.
> > >> >
> > >> > One
> thing
> > the Amendment has done is
> > >> shine a
> > >> > spotlight
> on
> > problems that have
> > >> existed for
> a long time, but
> > >> > which
> people
> > scarcely noticed
> > >> before.
> That they went
> > >> > unnoticed
> > before doesn't mean that
> > >> they were
> any less
> > >> > serious
> > before; only that many of us
> > >> were
> blissfully
> > >> > ignorant.
> > One might argue that
> > >> an
> "ignorance is
> > >> > bliss"
> > approach is warranted, but it
> > >> seems
> incompatible
> > >> > to
> basic
> > scientific principles that we
> > >> taxonomists
> would
> > >> > generally
> > like to adhere to.
> > >> >
> > >> > So,
> here are
> > some examples of things
> > >> that are
> > >> > helpful:
> > >> > -
> Specific
> > observations about how
> > >> > the
> existing
> > rules fail in particular
> > >> circumstances
> > >> > -
> > Constructive suggestions on how the
> > >> next
> > >> > edition
> of
> > the Code can be improved to
> > >> minimize
> such
> > >> > failures
> > >> >
> > >> > And
> here are
> > some
> > >> > examples
> of
> > things that are not
> > >> helpful:
> > >> > -
> > >> > Frantic
> > arm-waving and hyperbolic
> > >> exclamations
> about how the
> > >> > nomenclatural
> > sky is falling.
> > >> > -
> > >> > Misrepresentation
> > of problems with the
> > >> Code that
> have been
> > >> > illuminated
> > by the Amendment for
> > >> electronic
> publication as
> > >> > though
> they
> > were *caused* by the
> > >> Amendment
> (when in most
> > >> > cases
> they
> > were, in fact, extant prior
> > >> to the
> Amendment, and
> > >> > in
> many
> > cases at least mitigated to
> > >> some extent
> by the
> > >> > Amendment).
> > >> > -
> > Representing personal
> > >> > interpretations
> > about how the Code
> > >> "should"
> be,
> > >> > with
> what is
> > actually written in the
> > >> Code.
> > >> > -
> > >> > Utterly
> > bogus (and, frankly,
> > >> childish)
> accusations that
> > >> > the
> > Amendment was somehow nefariously
> > >> influenced
> by the
> > >> > needs/demands
> > of the for-profit
> > >> publishing
> community.
> > >> >
> > >> > Note:
> > Stephen, I am not
> > >> > necessarily
> > accusing you of all these
> > >> things; but
> I've
> > >> > seen
> > examples of them fly through
> > >> Taxacom and
> other venues
> > >> > on
> a regular
> > basis.
> > >> >
> > >> > In
> > >> > answer
> to
> > some of your specific
> > >> questions:
> every edit to
> > >> > every
> record
> > in ZooBank is logged with
> > >> information
> on what
> > >> > field
> was
> > changed, what the previous
> > >> and new
> values are, who
> > >> > changed
> > them, and exactly (to the
> > >> nearest
> millisecond, UTC
> > >> > time)
> when
> > the change was made. So,
> > >> for example,
> if you
> > >> > edited
> > archive info into the Zoobank
> > >> record for
> Systematic
> > >> > Entomology,
> > there would be a record of
> > >> the fact
> that you
> > >> > edited
> it,
> > and exactly when you edited
> > >> it. Not all
> of this
> > >> > information
> > is visible on the ZooBank
> > >> website, but
> as soon
> > >> > as
> we
> > receive the next round of
> > >> ZooBank
> development funding,
> > >> > much
> of it
> > will be added. In the
> > >> meantime, I
> am happy to
> > >> > retrieve
> and
> > provide this information
> > >> for any
> field of any
> > >> > record.
> > >> >
> > >> > Finally,
> can
> > you
> > >> > elaborate
> on
> > what you mean by this
> > >> statement:
> > >> > "BTW,
> > congrats to Z.-Q. Zhang on his
> > >> > recent
> > appointment as head of the
> > >> ICZN"
> > >> > ?
> > >> >
> > >> > Either
> you
> > >> > know
> > something that I don't, or this
> > >> serves as
> one more
> > >> > example
> > reflecting the reliability of
> > >> your
> insights on the
> > >> > ICZN
> and its
> > functions.
> > >> >
> > >> > Thanks,
> and
> > Aloha,
> > >> > Rich
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > Richard
> L.
> > >> > Pyle,
> PhD
> > >> > Database
> > Coordinator for Natural
> > >> > Sciences
> |
> > Associate Zoologist in
> > >> Ichthyology
> | Dive Safety
> > >> > Officer
> > >> > Department
> > of Natural Sciences,
> > >> > Bishop
> > Museum, 1525 Bernice St.,
> > >> Honolulu, HI
> 96817
> > >> > Ph:
> > (808)848-4115, Fax: (808)847-8252
> > >> email: deepreef at bishopmuseum.org
> > >> > http://hbs.bishopmuseum.org/staff/pylerichard.html
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > >
> > -----Original
> > >> > Message-----
> > >> > >
> From:
> > Stephen Thorpe
> > >> > [mailto:stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz]
> > >> > >
> Sent:
> > Friday, January 22, 2016
> > >> 10:29 AM
> > >> > >
> To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu;
> > >> > 'engel';
> > 'Doug Yanega';
> > >> > >
> > >> > deepreef at bishopmuseum.org
> > >> > >
> > Subject: RE: [Taxacom] two names
> > >> online
> > >> > published
> -
> > one new species
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> The
> > issue may not be "huge", but
> > >> > I
> think it
> > is probably bigger than
> > >> you
> > >> > >
> > >> > indicate.
> > There can be problems in
> > >> determining
> "the
> > >> > earliest
> > date on which all
> > >> > >
> of the
> > >> > requirements
> > have been met". Adding to
> > >> this problem
> is
> > >> > the
> fact
> > that
> > >> > >
> many
> > publishers are
> > >> > publishing
> > print editions online ahead
> > >> of actual
> print
> > >> > >
> > (sometimes by months). We have
> > >> already
> > >> > seen
> Frank
> > Krell suggest, quite
> > >> > >
> > >> > erroneously
> > in my view, that "March
> > >> 2016" must
> be
> > >> > a
> mistake on
> > the
> > >> > >
> > Cretaceous Research
> > >> > website.
> In
> > fact, it is no mistake!
> > >> They have
> published
> > >> > >
> their
> > March 2016 print edition
> > >> online
> > >> > already,
> but
> > it presumably won't be
> > >> > >
> > >> > actually
> > printed until March! One, I
> > >> suppose only
> fairly
> > >> > minor
> > problem,
> > >> > >
> > concerns the nominal
> > >> > year
> of
> > publication for taxon names,
> > >> which is
> > >> > >
> > frequently widely appended to the
> > >> names
> > >> > (i.e.,
> Aus
> > bus Author, YEAR). It is
> > >> > >
> now
> > >> > very
> hard to
> > choose between one year
> > >> and the next
> (if online
> > >> > versions
> > >> > >
> are
> > published in one year, but
> > >> > the
> print
> > version isn't actually
> > >> printed
> until the
> > >> > >
> > following year). Another problem
> > >> is that
> > >> > many
> people
> > have wasted a
> > >> > >
> > significant
> > >> > amount
> of
> > time doing preregistrations
> > >> on ZooBank
> that were
> > >> > in
> > >> > >
> fact
> > pointless. They thought
> > >> that
> > >> > they
> were
> > validly publishing online
> > >> first!
> > >> > >
> There
> > are also issues relating to
> > >> how easy
> > >> > it
> might be
> > to make apparently
> > >> > >
> > >> > retroactive
> > edits on ZooBank, which
> > >> cannot be
> (at least not
> > >> > publicly)
> > >> > >
> > datestamped (for example,
> > >> > what
> would
> > happen if I now edited
> > >> archive
> info
> > >> > >
> into
> > the Zoobank record for
> > >> Systematic
> > >> > Entomology?)
> > Regrettably, I think
> > >> > >
> that
> > >> > in
> the rush
> > to push through a Zootaxa
> > >> optimised
> electronic
> > >> > amendment,
> > >> > >
> the
> > ICZN has created rather
> > >> > a
> confusing
> > mess for many authors and
> > >> > >
> > >> > publishers
> > to try to deal with. BTW,
> > >> congrats to
> Z.-Q. Zhang
> > >> > on
> his
> > recent
> > >> > >
> > appointment as head of
> > >> > the
> ICZN (I
> > would have thought that
> > >> there was
> > >> > >
> rather
> > a big COI involved there,
> > >> but
> > >> > apparently
> > not...)
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > Stephen
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > --------------------------------------------
> > >> > >
> On Fri,
> > 22/1/16, Richard Pyle
> > >> <deepreef at bishopmuseum.org>
> > >> > wrote:
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > Subject:
> > >> > RE:
> > [Taxacom] two names online
> > >> published -
> one new
> > >> > species
> > >> > >
> > To: "'Stephen
> > >> > Thorpe'"
> > <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>,
> > >> > >
> taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu,
> > >> > "'engel'"
> > <msengel at ku.edu>,
> > >> > "'Doug
> > >> > >
> > Yanega'"
> > >> > <dyanega at ucr.edu>
> > >> > >
> > Received: Friday, 22
> > >> January,
> 2016, 6:45
> > >> > PM
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > Well,
> > >> > it's
> > neither
> > >> > >
> > new, nor huge*.
> > >> > But
> it is a
> > problem, and it was a
> > >> problem
> that was
> > >> > >
> > recognized prior to the
> > >> publication
> of
> > >> > the
> > Amendment, and one which
> > >> the
> > >> > >
> > >> > Commissioners
> > have discussed
> > >> several
> times.
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > The
> > >> > >
> > fundamental question that
> > >> we do not
> have
> > >> > a
> definitive
> > answer for yet
> > >> (even
> > >> > >
> > >> > though
> we
> > have an over-abundance of
> > >> opinions),
> is how to
> > >> > establish
> > the
> > >> > >
> date of
> > publication for
> > >> > purposes
> > of priority, when the
> > >> following
> dates are
> > >> > >
> > non-identical:
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > 1) The date on which the
> > >> > >
> > publication was registered
> > >> in
> > >> > ZooBank.
> > >> > >
> > 2)
> > >> > >
> > >> > The
> date of
> > publication as stated in
> > >> the ZooBank
> record.
> > >> > >
> > 3) The date of publication
> > >> as stated
> in
> > >> > the
> > work itself.
> > >> > >
> > 4) The date on
> > >> > which
> the
> > first
> > >> > >
> > electronic edition of
> > >> > the
> work was
> > obtainable.
> > >> > >
> > 5) The date
> > >> > on
> which the
> > ISSN or ISBN was
> > >> added
> to the ZooBank
> > >> > record.
> > >> > >
> > 6) The date on which
> > >> > >
> > the Intended archive was
> > >> added to
> the
> > >> > ZooBank
> > record.
> > >> > >
> > 7) The date on which
> > >> > a
> revised
> > version of the
> > >> electronic
> edition of the work
> > >> > >
> was
> > obtainable (e.g.,
> > >> containing
> > >> > evidence
> of
> > registration).
> > >> > >
> > 8) The
> > >> > >
> > date on which paper copies
> > >> were
> > >> > obtainable.
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > There
> are
> > other dates as well
> > >> > >
> > (e.g.,
> > >> > the
> date of
> > publication as stated in
> > >> the
> paper edition of
> > >> > the
> work,
> > >> > >
> etc.),
> > but I hope you get the
> > >> > point
> > that it's not a simple
> > >> issue,
> because there
> > >> > >
> are
> > many possible dates
> > >> associated
> with
> > >> > a
> given
> > work.
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > So...
> which
> > is the date of
> > >> > >
> > >> > publication
> > for purposes of
> > >> priority?
> Certainly, most
> > >> > would
> agree
> > that it
> > >> > >
> cannot
> > be prior to
> > >> > #4
> (assuming
> > the above list is
> > >> in
> chronological
> > >> > >
> > sequence). Certainly,
> > >> not
> after #8
> > >> > (provided
> > the paper edition meets all
> > >> > >
> > >> > other
> > criteria of the code for
> > >> paper-based
> > >> > publications).
> > Most
> > >> > >
> > Commissioners I
> > >> > have
> > discussed this with agree that
> > >> the
> logical answer
> > >> > is,
> > >> > >
> > generally "the earliest date
> > >> > on
> > which all of the requirements
> > >> have been
> > >> > >
> > met". As #2 has
> > >> no
> > >> > bearing
> on
> > any article in the
> > >> Code, we can
> probably
> > >> > >
> ignore
> > that one. But all
> > >> the
> others
> > >> > are
> in
> > potential play. One could
> > >> argue
> > >> > >
> > (pretty effectively, in
> > >> fact), that
> > >> > while
> the
> > Code requires
> > >> electronic
> works to
> > >> > >
> include
> > the date of publication
> > >> to be
> > >> > stated
> > within the work itself, there
> > >> is no
> > >> > >
> > requirement that it be the
> > >> *correct*
> > >> > date
> of
> > publication. Indeed, if
> > >> such a
> > >> > >
> > requirement was, in fact, part of
> > >> the Code
> > >> > (or
> how the
> > Code is
> > >> interpreted),
> > >> > >
> > >> > stability
> > would most likely suffer.
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > Until there is clarity on
> > >> this
> > >> > >
> > issue, either by
> > >> Declaration,
> Amendment,
> > >> > formal
> > statement, or ratified
> > >> 5th
> > >> > >
> > >> > Edition
> by
> > the Commission, it seems to
> > >> me
> (and most others
> > >> > I've
> > discussed it
> > >> > >
> with),
> > that the
> > >> > trusty
> "the
> > earliest date on which all
> > >> of the
> > >> > requirements
> > >> > >
> have
> > been met"
> > >> > approach
> > seems the most logical
> > >> to use as a
> guideline.
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > Aloha,
> > >> > >
> > Rich
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > *The reason it's not a
> > >> > "huge"
> > >> > >
> > issue is that it
> > >> > ultimately
> > affects date of publication
> > >> for
> purposes of
> > >> > priority;
> > >> > >
> and
> > while there may be a few
> > >> > cases
> > where potentially
> > >> competing
> names
> > >> > >
> both
> > fall within the "grey
> > >> > zone",
> there
> > certainly aren't many.
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > > -----Original
> > >> > >
> > Message-----
> > >> > >
> > >
> > >> > From:
> > Stephen Thorpe
> > >> > >
> > [mailto:stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz]
> > >> > >
> > > Sent: Thursday,
> > >> January 21,
> 2016
> > >> > 11:53
> > AM > To:
> > >> > >
> taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu;
> > >> > engel;
> Doug
> > Yanega > Cc:
> > >> > >
> deepreef at bishopmuseum.org
> > >> > >
> > Subject: Re: [Taxacom] two names
> > >> online
> > >> > >
> > published - one new species
> > >> >
> >
> > >> > Doug
> (CC
> > Rich), > >
> > >> I think we
> may have
> > >> > >
> just
> > stumbled upon a huge
> > >> problem:
> > >> > "the
> > ZooBank >
> > >> registration
> state both
> > >> > >
> the
> > name of an electronic
> > >> archive
> > >> > intended
> > to > preserve the
> > >> work
> and ..."
> > >> > >
> > >
> > >> > >
> > > I
> > >> > have
> > >> > >
> > always assumed that the
> > >> > publisher
> > does this, once for
> > >> each
> journal?
> > >> > >
> > > Certainly Magnolia
> > >> Press does
> > >> > >
> > it for Zootaxa (not
> > >> surprisingly,
> > >> > perhaps,
> > since > the whole
> > >> electronic
> > >> > >
> > amendment is arguably
> > >> optimised
> for
> > >> > Zootaxa).
> > How > many
> > >> authors
> think
> > >> > >
> to
> > worry about the archive when
> > >> > registering
> > articles on
> > >> >
> ZooBank? Bugger
> > >> > >
> all!
> > >> > >
> > Looking at
> > >> > some
> random
> > records on ZooBank, I'm
> > >> now
> > worried
> > >> > that
> a
> > >> > >
> large
> > number of them fail
> > >> this
> > >> > requirement!
> > I think we need
> > >> > some
> > >> > >
> > clarification here (Rich?)
> > >> >
> >
> > >> > Stephen
> > > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > --------------------------------------------
> > >> > >
> > > On Fri, 22/1/16, Doug
> > >> Yanega
> <dyanega at ucr.edu>
> > >> > >
> > wrote:
> > >> > >
> > >
> > >> > >
> > > Subject:
> > >> > >
> > >> > Re:
> > [Taxacom] two names online
> > >> published -
> one new
> > >> > species
> > > To:
> > >> > >
> taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu,
> > >> > "engel"
> > <msengel at ku.edu>
> > >> > >
> > Received:
> > >> > >
> Friday,
> > 22 January,
> > >> > 2016,
> > >> > >
> > 10:17 AM
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > > On
> > >> > >
> > >> > 1/21/16
> 1:03
> > PM,
> > >> > >
> > > Stephen
> > >> > Thorpe
> > >> > >
> > wrote:
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > > It is worth
> > >> > >
> > > noting
> > >> > that
> Michael
> > Engel did
> > >> > >
> > preregister
> > >> > his
> article
> > (twice
> > >> > >
> > >
> > >> > >
> > actually!) on ZooBank:
> > >> > >
> > > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > > 18 October 2015
> > >> http://zoobank.org/References/A6A94078-42E5-48B8-
> > >> > >
> > > B602-49DA7D0523F6
> > >> > >
> > >
> > >> > >
> > [Record not
> > >> > publicly
> > viewable]
> > >> > >
> > > >
> > >> > >
> > 13
> > >> > >
> > >
> > >> > November
> > 2015 http://zoobank.org/References/ADFE8605-38F3-45C6-
> > >> > >
> > > B686-5094367C9695
> > >> > >
> > >
> > >> > >
> > >
> > >> > >
> > > > It would
> > >> therefore
> > >> > >
> > > appear to be the
> > >> fault of
> the
> > >> > journal
> > (Cretaceous
> > >> Research)
> editorial
> > >> > >
> > team > that no
> > >> ZooBank
> registration
> > >> > was
> > indicated in the
> > >> publication,
> and
> > >> > >
> > very > unfortunate
> > >> in
> this case
> > >> > since
> > it the same taxon was
> > >> apparently
> > >> > >
> > validly > described as
> > >> new by
> > >> > Pohl
> > & Beutel shortly
> > >> after!
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >
> > >> > >
> > > It is not just
> > >> > this
> one
> > thing that
> > >> > >
> > causes the name
> > >> > to
> be
> > unavailable.
> > >> > >
> > >
> > >> > >
> > There are *three*
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > requirements under
> > >> > >
> > the present
> > >> > ICZN,
> and
> > the Engel et al.
> > >> online
> paper > failed to
> > >> > comply
> with
> > >> > >
> *two*
> > of them, not
> > >> just
> > >> > one.
> > Note the following
> > >> > (from
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> http://iczn.org/content/electronic-publication-made-available-
> > >> > >
> > amendment-
> > >> > >
> > >
> > >> > code):
> > >> > >
> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> "
> > The requirements for
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > electronic publications are
> > >> that
> the work be
> > >> > registered
> > in ZooBank before
> > >> > >
> > it >
> > >> > is
> > published, that the work
> > >> itself
> state the date
> > of
> > >> > publication
> > and
> > >> > >
> > contain > evidence
> > >> > that
> > registration has
> > >> occurred,
> and that the
> > ZooBank
> > >> > >
> > registration >
> > >> state
> both the name
> > >> > of
> an
> > electronic archive
> > >> intended to
> > >> > >
> > preserve the work > and
> > >> the ISSN or
> > >> > ISBN
> > > >
> > >> associated
> with the work."
> > >> > >
> > >
> > >> > >
> > > The
> > >> > online
> > version of this
> > >> > >
> > > work
> > >> > fulfills
> the
> > first of these
> > >> > >
> > >> > criteria,
> > but neither of the
> > >> latter two.
> > >> > >
> > >
> > >> > >
> > >
> > >> > Sincerely,
> > >> > >
> > >
> > >> > >
> > > --
> > >> > >
> > >
> > >> > Doug
> > Yanega Dept.
> > >> > >
> > > of
> > >> > Entomology
> > >> > >
> > >>
> Entomology
> > >> > Research
> > Museum Univ.
> > >> of
> California, >
> > Riverside,
> > >> > CA
> > >> > >
> > > 92521-0314
> > >> >
> skype:
> > >> > >
> > dyanega
> > >> > >
> > > phone: (951)
> > >> 827-4315
> > >> > >
> > (disclaimer: opinions
> > >> are
> mine, not
> > >> > UCR's)
> > >> > >
> >
> > >> > http://cache.ucr.edu/~heraty/yanega.html
> > >> > >
> > >
> > >> "There
> are
> > >> > some
> > >> > >
> > enterprises
> > >> > >
> > > in which a
> > >> careful
> > >> > >
> > disorderliness
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> is the
> > true method" - Herman
> > >> Melville,
> > >> > Moby
> Dick,
> > Chap. 82 >
> > >> >
> > >> > >
> > >> > _______________________________________________
> > >> > >
> > > Taxacom Mailing
> > >> List
> > >> > >
> > > Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> > >> > >
> > > http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> > >> > >
> > > The Taxacom
> > >> Archive back
> to 1992
> > >> > may
> > be searched at:
> > >> > >
> > > http://taxacom.markmail.org
> > >> > >
> > >
> > >> > >
> > >
> > >> > Celebrating
> > 29
> > >> > >
> > years of
> > >> > >
> > > Taxacom in
> > >> 2016.
> > >> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > >> > Taxacom
> Mailing List
> > >> > Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> > >> > http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> > >> > The
> Taxacom Archive back to
> > 1992 may be searched at:
> > >> http://taxacom.markmail.org
> > >> >
> > >> >
> Celebrating 29 years of
> > Taxacom in 2016.
> > >> --
> > >> __________________________________________________
> > >>
> Michael A. Ivie, Ph.D.,
> > F.R.E.S.
> > >> US
> Post Office Address:
> > >> Montana
> Entomology Collection
> > >> Marsh Labs,
> Room 50
> > >> 1911 West
> Lincoln Street
> > >> Montana
> State University
> > >> Bozeman, MT
> 59717
> > >> USA
> > >> UPS,
> FedEx, DHL Address:
> > >> Montana
> Entomology Collection
> > >> Marsh Labs,
> Room 50
> > >> 1911 West
> Lincoln Street
> > >> Montana
> State University
> > >> Bozeman, MT
> 59718
> > >> USA
> > >>
> (406) 994-4610
> > (voice)
> > >> (406)
> 994-6029 (FAX)
> > >> mivie at montana.edu
> > >>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> > >> Taxacom
> Mailing List
> > >> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> > >> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> > >> The Taxacom
> Archive back to 1992
> > may be searched at:
> > >> http://taxacom.markmail.org
> > >>
> Celebrating 29 years of
> > Taxacom in 2016.
> > >>
> > >> .
> > >>
> > >
> >
> > --
> > __________________________________________________
> >
> > Michael A. Ivie, Ph.D., F.R.E.S.
> >
> > US Post Office Address:
> > Montana Entomology Collection
> > Marsh Labs, Room 50
> > 1911 West Lincoln Street
> > Montana State University
> > Bozeman, MT 59717
> > USA
> >
> > UPS, FedEx, DHL Address:
> > Montana Entomology Collection
> > Marsh Labs, Room 50
> > 1911 West Lincoln Street
> > Montana State University
> > Bozeman, MT 59718
> > USA
> >
> >
> > (406) 994-4610 (voice)
> > (406) 994-6029 (FAX)
> > mivie at montana.edu
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Taxacom Mailing List
> > Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> > http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> > The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may
> be searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org
> >
> > Celebrating 29 years of Taxacom in
> 2016.
> >
> > .
> >
>
> --
> __________________________________________________
>
> Michael A. Ivie, Ph.D., F.R.E.S.
>
> US Post Office Address:
> Montana Entomology Collection
> Marsh Labs, Room 50
> 1911 West Lincoln Street
> Montana State University
> Bozeman, MT 59717
> USA
>
> UPS, FedEx, DHL Address:
> Montana Entomology Collection
> Marsh Labs, Room 50
> 1911 West Lincoln Street
> Montana State University
> Bozeman, MT 59718
> USA
>
>
> (406) 994-4610 (voice)
> (406) 994-6029 (FAX)
> mivie at montana.edu
>
>
> .
>
--
__________________________________________________
Michael A. Ivie, Ph.D., F.R.E.S.
US Post Office Address:
Montana Entomology Collection
Marsh Labs, Room 50
1911 West Lincoln Street
Montana State University
Bozeman, MT 59717
USA
UPS, FedEx, DHL Address:
Montana Entomology Collection
Marsh Labs, Room 50
1911 West Lincoln Street
Montana State University
Bozeman, MT 59718
USA
(406) 994-4610 (voice)
(406) 994-6029 (FAX)
mivie at montana.edu
More information about the Taxacom
mailing list