[Taxacom] two names online published - one new species
Stephen Thorpe
stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz
Fri Jan 22 16:59:43 CST 2016
>Read what it says, not what you want it to say<
It may come as a shock, Mike, but the English language does not have a perfectly well defined one-to-one correlation between what is said and what is meant (which is one of the main reasons why the Code can be so problematic). Language is inherently vague and ambiguous. My interpretation of what is meant is a perfectly valid one, but this is a minor side issue at best!
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: "Stephen Thorpe" <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>, taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
Received: Saturday, 23 January, 2016, 11:54 AM
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