|
Shishugounykus is saved but I just noticed "Asfaltovenator" is not. Also checked all the dinosaur taxa from the other potential journal to have this issue, Nature Communications, but they are very consistent and always have a Nomenclatural Acts section. So
it's really just Scientific Reports that dropped the ball, which is odd since both are owned by Nature.
As for the petition, I think it's still good to have a method to weed out anyone who can make a pdf available online. What about changing things so that the journal itself could be registered to the ZooBank database, and thus anything published in the journal
would be valid? And in the meantime, maybe contact the authors for a mass petition to the ICZN to make their Scientific Reports names available retroactively, plus contacting the Scientific Reports editors to tell them they need to start enforcing this stuff
in the future?
Mickey From: dinosaur-l-request@usc.edu <dinosaur-l-request@usc.edu> on behalf of David Marjanovic <david.marjanovic@gmx.at>
Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2020 11:37 AM To: dinosaur-l@usc.edu <dinosaur-l@usc.edu> Subject: [dinosaur] In Sci. Rep., only *Shishugounykus* is available So I searched all their descriptions for "zoob", "lsid" and "urn:" until I found a hit.
The description of Shishugounykus
has been registered:
"This published work and its nomenclatural acts have been registered in ZooBank which is a proposed online registration system for the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (IZCN). The LSID (Life science identifiers) for this publication is urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:B12FD816-4CEA-4681-A4B3-AE1E6639D969.
The associated information can also be viewed through any standard web browser by appending the LSID to the prefix “http://zoobank.org/”.
"
The descriptions of "Lingyuanosaurus", "Fukuivenator", "Savannasaurus", "Tongtianlong", "Corythoraptor",
Daspletosaurus "horneri", "Isaberrysaura", "Mierasaurus", "Xingxiulong", "Anomalipes", "Jinyunpelta", "Yizhousaurus", "Bajadasaurus", "Xingtianosaurus", "Huanansaurus", "Mosaiceratops", "Pulanesaura", "Zhenyuanlong" and as mentioned "Yunyangosaurus"
have not.
That's the entire rest of the list.
I am right now going to write a petition asking to retroactively (to 2012, when electronic publication was allowed at all) waive the requirement for registration for open-access publications, on the grounds that the description is in the
first three Google hits for each of the "names" above (once I searched for "anomalipes dinosaur", because
anomalipes exists as a species name) and that several of these names have been treated as valid in later papers, and then I'm going to submit it to the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature.
Anyone who wants to join me as an author, please drop me an e-mail.
Feel free to offer help. In particular, "open-access publications" should perhaps be restricted to those that archive properly & stuff, perhaps those that comply with some existing open-access policy. I couldn't narrow this down in a minute of clicking
on links or googling for "open-access policy", but I'm sure it can be done.
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 22. Januar 2020 um 05:49 Uhr
Von: "Iain Reid" <iainstein27@gmail.com> All invalid according to this, only the dinosaurs:
|