[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: Coelophysis 18, Rioarribasaurus 8



In a message dated 96-06-24 12:49:03 EDT, nking.ucs@smtp.usi.edu (King, Norm)
writes:

>OK, that's my soap-box spiel for today.  But I have a question.  
>Dinogeorge and others have referred on occasion to _nomen nudums_ 
>(_nuda_?)

_nomina nuda_

>created on stamps or in other equally unsatisfactory media.  My 
>understanding is that such "publication" of a name has never qualified to 
>introduce a taxonomic name, hence such media do not, in fact, establish 
>nomen nudums(?), or anything else that we need to keep track of.  Aren't 
>the rules clear as to what counts as a valid medium of publication for a 
>name, and that a stamp, for example, doesn't qualify?

Absolutely right. A name first used on a postage stamp, on a notepad cover,
or in a guidebook to a public dinosaur exhibition, etc. is merely a
vernacular name until its scientific description is published. I keep track
of such names, however, as long as they are associated with real material,
because I'm wacky that way. Otherwise, there's always a chance that someone
could come across the name in its unscientific context and wonder why it
doesn't appear in my supposedly "complete" list of dinosaurs. Listing such
vernacular names, along with notations explaining that they are vernacular
and not scientific, etc., is more helpful than simply ignoring them. Also
more fun.

By the way, did you know that if you sit around too long without moving, you
get Saurischia?