Re: [dinosaur] "Yunyangosaurus" is not available

[Mike Taylor <sauropoda@gmail.com>]

I agree entirely. Zoological nomenclature is supposed to serve the
community, not vice versa.

-- Mike.

On Fri, 24 Jan 2020 at 06:13, Tim Williams <tijawi@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I know there is going to be a lot of people who disagree with me on
> this, but... I'm not certain it's useful to declare a whole swathe of
> dinosaur genera as nomina nuda, simply because they fall afoul of some
> technicality in the ICZN Code (Article 8.5.3).  Instead, a pragmatic
> 'community standard' can be applied here.  If workers in the field
> continue to treat these names as valid, then for all intents and
> purposes they are valid.  All were published in legitimate journals
> (with an ISSN), with the best of intentions - there is no hint of
> malfeasance.  So until this nomenclatural issue is rectified or
> resolved, I think the best course of action is to continue to treat
> these digitally published names as available.  There's no need to
> throw the baby out with the bathwater.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 4:35 PM Tyler Greenfield
> <tgreenfield999@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Jim Kirkland has pointed out on Twitter that Geology of the Intermountain 
> > West seems to be in the same situation. This would mean that 
> > Maraapunisaurus and Dryosaurus elderae are nomina nuda as well.
> > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_Paleojim_status_1220573427188191232&d=DwIFaQ&c=clK7kQUTWtAVEOVIgvi0NU5BOUHhpN0H8p7CSfnc_gI&r=Ry_mO4IFaUmGof_Yl9MyZgecRCKHn5g4z1CYJgFW9SI&m=7ttzoy3StzASf7ytO6xXwHAU_FW9kDGUZvaUjD-_l9Y&s=5XxcN1ImSTYA6zC2Bk97tDuE69ZKAp5FRzX7_zmGwMI&e=
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 1:31 PM David Marjanovic <david.marjanovic@gmx.at> 
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Gesendet: Dienstag, 21. Januar 2020 um 17:24 Uhr
> >> Von: "Mickey Mortimer" <mickey_mortimer111@msn.com>
> >> Betreff: [dinosaur] Validity of "Yunyangosaurus" / is Scientific Reports 
> >> published physically?
> >>
> >> > Hi all.  While writing the "Yunyangosaurus" entry for The Theropod 
> >> > Database, I noticed Dai et al.'s (2020) paper describing it has no 
> >> > mention of ZooBank.  ICZN Article 8.5.3. states names published 
> >> > electronically must "be registered in the Official Register of 
> >> > Zoological Nomenclature (ZooBank) (see Article 78.2.4) and contain 
> >> > evidence in the work itself that such registration has occurred."  So 
> >> > this obviously fails, and the name doesn't show up in ZooBank either.  
> >> > Normally that solves itself eventually by the physical publication of 
> >> > the journal volume, but "Yunyangosaurus" was described in Scientific 
> >> > Reports.  As far as I can tell, Scientific Reports has no actual 
> >> > volumes,  just a huge list of articles every year, which would suggest 
> >> > it is not physically published.  Is this so?  And if so, doesn't that 
> >> > indicate that Dai et al. 2020 will never be valid under the ICZN and 
> >> > that something else needs to be done by the authors to fix this?
> >>
> >> According to its website, Scientific Reports has an online ISSN, but a 
> >> paper ISSN is nowhere mentioned. This means that, as expected, it is 
> >> published exclusively online, and that the name "Yunyangosaurus" is not 
> >> available from the publication by Dai et al. (2020) or any other that yet 
> >> exists.
> >>
> >> "Not available" means the ICZN doesn't recognize it as even existing. It 
> >> does not compete for synonymy or homonymy.
> >>
> >> So, the ethical thing to do is to alert the authors that they need to 
> >> publish a whole new paper. In that paper, they can say "Diagnosis: see Dai 
> >> et al. (2020)", so the paper can be quite short, but it needs to be a 
> >> whole new publication.