[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: [dinosaur] Evolution of giant flightless birds (free pdf)
> The fact that the name ends in -idae (and is clearly not a genus or
> species) might mean that it's treated as a family-level taxon (per
> Article 29.2), even though the original authors do not explicitly call
> it a family.
While Art. 29.2 is yet another missed opportunity to spell things out, it's
clear that it only goes one way: all family names have to end in -idae, but not
every name in -idae is automatically a family name, let alone an available
Art. 18.104.22.168. states that, to be valid, a family-group name has to "be a noun
in the nominative plural formed from the stem of an available generic name".
Vegaviidae is formed from the stem of an available generic name plus an extra
_i_... I wonder if that counts...
> The original publication
> contains three variants of the spelling: _Versperopterylus_ and
> _Vesperopterylus_, as well as _Versperopterus_ (lurking in the
> supplementary materials).
Nobody knows if supplementary information counts as part of a paper (if the
paper is validly published) or not. This is a glaring omission in the Code.
> the following year the unintended spelling _Richardoestesia_ appeared
> in a published list of dinosaur names as the correct spelling
> (Olshevsky, 1991). Thus, this publication served as First Reviser,
> and inadvertently fixed _Richardoestesia_ as the official name (which
> was not Olshevsky's intention at all).
I think a case can be made that an Action of First Reviser was not needed in
this case and that therefore Olshevsky's publication did not constitute one.