[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Andesaurus redescribed
*Duriatitan* isn't a nomen nudum, just relatively obscure. The full
citation has been on Wikipedia for a few months (there doesn't seem
to have an electronic version of the actual paper, unfortunately).
Barrett, PM, RJB Benson & P Upchurch, 2010. Dinosaurs of Dorset: Part
II, the sauropod dinosaurs (Saurischia, Sauropoda) with additional
comments on the theropods. Proceedings of the Dorset Natural History
and Archaeological Society 131: 113–126.
Isn't this the kind of thing that puts traditional publishing of
scientific papers ad absurdum and then heaps mockery on it?
I mean, is anybody seriously expected to get that article by any other
means than asking the authors for a pdf or reprint? Will anybody buy
that journal for that article? Will anybody outside of Dorset even be
able to find it in a library and take a photocopy? Will the Dorset
Natural History and Archaeological Society make a single penny from it,
let alone break even?
I guess the Proceedings don't have page charges for authors, while the
PLoS journals charge a lot. I further guess the Proceedings are
circulated just widely enough to count as published for the ICZN...