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

Re: dating (of papers, not people)



In a message dated 97-03-16 12:08:11 EST, dinoguy@interlog.com (Darryl)
writes:

<< I see the date of the description of Monolophosaurus and Sinraptor listed
as
 1994.  This confuses me.  The copy of the Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences
 that has these papers in it that I own clearly says October-November 1993.
 Why is the date changed for references to this journal?>>

The October-November 1993 issue of CJES was unavoidably delayed until
February or March 1994. ICZN rules mandate that it is the >actual< date of
publication that determines priority of taxonomic-->if< the actual date is
known to differ from the stated date.

<<  I have seen this on other papers as well (the Osborn 1916/1917 paper).
 Does it have to do with the date that the paper "actually hit the stands"?
 If this is true,
 shouldn't somebody tell the publishers that they are just confusing things
 by not releasing on the published date? :-) >>

This "time-honored tradition" of back-dating scientific publications goes
back at least to the late 19th-century Cope-Marsh "wars" and probably
earlier. The fun comes when a paper supposedly published on a certain date
already contains >citations< to papers published after that date(!). This
happened with some of Cope's papers.

Most reputable journals are, however, published on the stated date of
publication.