Re: [dinosaur] Aerodraco & Nicorhynchus, new genera with review of anhanguerid pterosaurs (free pdf)

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

The name "N. smaugi" _only_ occurs as a label of a cladogram branch in fig. 10. 
There is no diagnosis and no type specimen; the name is thus unavailable under 
both Art. 13.1 (diagnosis required, or citation of a diagnosis elsewhere, or 
the name has to be an explicit replacement name) and Art. 16.4 (explicit type 
fixation required).

It can be safely ignored.
 
(Failure to comply with Art. 13 specifically makes it a nomen nudum, says the 
ICZN glossary entry for that term.)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

With that out of the way, here's my exploration of another problem posed by 
that paper and many, many, many others â probably the vast majority of all 
that were published in the last nine years.

> Since it is still in-press, it can maybe be corrected before final 
> publication?
Â
Nope! "In press" refers to the literal printing press that will be used to 
produce the dead-tree edition, which is irrelevant because of this little 
paragraph on the 3rd page:
Â
>>
Nomenclatural acts.âThis published work and the nomenclatural
acts it contains, have been registered in ZooBank:
urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:84FCB40E-8207-4EDF-BA46-
5455101EE488
<<

The paper thus fulfills Art. 8.5:

>>
8.5. Works issued and distributed electronically
To be considered published, a work issued and distributed electronically must
8.5.1. have been issued after 2011,
8.5.2. state the date of publication in the work itself, and
8.5.3. 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.
<<

(Art. 8.5.2 is fulfilled by this line on the first page: "Received 26 March 
2020, accepted 13 June 2020, available online 25 September 2020.")

Thanks to Art. 21.9

>>
21.9. Works issued on paper and electronically
A name or nomenclatural act published in a work issued in both print and 
electronic editions takes its date of publication from the edition that first 
fulfilled the criteria of publication of Article 8 and is not excluded by 
Article 9.
<<

, the ICZN thus considers the paper and the names published since today. It's 
too late to correct anything.

...

...except that the ICZN is, as usual, not explicit enough that I could actually 
tell for sure. There is Art. 9:

>>
Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 8, none of the following constitutes 
published work within the meaning of the Code:
[...]
9.9. preliminary versions of works accessible electronically in advance of 
publication (see Article 21.8.3);
<<

and Art. 21.8:

>>
21.8. Advance distribution of separates and preprints
Advance distribution of separates or preprints affects date of publication as 
specified by the following criteria:
[...]
21.8.3. Some works are accessible online in preliminary versions before the 
publication date of the final version. Such advance electronic access does not 
advance the date of publication of a work, as preliminary versions are not 
published (Article 9.9).
<<

Nowhere (glossary included) is it explained what a "preliminary version" or 
indeed a "final version" is. Maybe the paper as now available is a "preliminary 
version" because its volume and page numbers are "(X): xxxâxxx" (the pages 
other than the first are numbered 2â19, but that will likely change once the 
dead-tree edition comes out). But that is the _only_ difference to the future 
paper edition; the layout will not change, let alone the content (down to which 
letters appear on which pages), so it sounds like Art. 8.1.3.2 is fulfilled:

>>
Article 8. What constitutes published work
A work is to be regarded as published for the purposes of zoological 
nomenclature if it complies with the requirements of this Article and is not 
excluded by the provisions of Article 9.
8.1. Criteria to be met
A work must satisfy the following criteria:
8.1.1. it must be issued for the purpose of providing a public and permanent 
scientific record,
8.1.2. it must be obtainable, when first issued, free of charge or by purchase, 
and
8.1.3. it must have been produced in an edition containing simultaneously 
obtainable copies by a method that assures
8.1.3.1. numerous identical and durable copies (see Article 8.4), or
8.1.3.2. widely accessible electronic copies with fixed content and layout.
<<

Maybe "preliminary version" is intended to refer only to accepted manuscripts 
that are put online as such but have not yet undergone layouting or 
proofreading; various journals like Systematic Biology or indeed Acta Pal. Pol. 
do that, and what we're talking about here is clearly not an unformatted 
accepted manuscript. And even _such_ things are not "separates or preprints", 
which is what Art. 21.8 is supposedly about...

Have you noticed how infuriatingly circular Art. 9.9 is? I don't mean the fact 
that 9.9 and 21.8.3 cite each other; several Articles are repeated in different 
places in the Code, which makes it a bit more readable, and that's a good 
thing. I mean that 9.9 says "in advance of publication" _in the definition_ of 
what does not count as publication, presented as the complete list of 
exceptions to Art. 8 which defines what _does_ count as publication â 
everything that fulfills Art. 8 is published unless it's excluded by Art. 9.