Re: Minotaurasaurus controversy

[David Marjanovic <david.marjanovic@gmx.at>]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Luis Oscar Romero" <lor@fibertel.com.ar>
To: "dinosaur" <dinosaur@usc.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2009 6:38 PM
Subject: RE: Minotaurasaurus controversy

> English not being my native language, maybe I have failed to be clear. 
> What I meant by "properly published" it's a new publication that replaces 
> the former one, assigns a new name to the fossil, and drops the bad guy 
> into oblivion... (".. The name of the perpetrator...").

But there is no way to drop a valid name into oblivion, and 
*Minotaurasaurus* is valid, because there is a type specimen, a diagnosis, 
and so on. Neither the provenance of the specimen nor (while I am at it) the 
stupid second _a_ in the name matter at all. To assign a new name to the 
fossil would mean to create an objective junior synonym which would be 
invalid.

The whole ICZN is online: http://www.iczn.org/iczn/index.jsp