[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...