Re: [dinosaur] Theropod limb lengthening + Vitakrisaurus + titanosaurs + more (free pdfs)

All of Malkani's dinosaur taxa are *nomina nuda*; I've compiled a list
(with references) and what ICZN requirements they fail to meet*. *I'm sure
his pterosaurs, crocodilians, and ichnotaxa are the same but I have yet to
look into them.

https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.deviantart.com_carnoferox_art_Dinosaur-2DNames-2Dto-2DAvoid-2DUsing-2D784219870&d=DwIFaQ&c=clK7kQUTWtAVEOVIgvi0NU5BOUHhpN0H8p7CSfnc_gI&r=Ry_mO4IFaUmGof_Yl9MyZgecRCKHn5g4z1CYJgFW9SI&m=Di9mpVNz6HBd2Hgy-EDIzv3SchVor9CR64LlKxAR1IM&s=g_z9NTEzzx_hcWCJNvCOyHX3gPoi7sj7BCiTe-8isqQ&e= 


On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 12:32 PM David Marjanovic <[email protected]>
wrote:

> The articles in the Open Journal of Geology are explicitly not meant to
> establish new names; they all cite earlier works, mostly the following, as
> having already done that.
>
> Malkani M.S. 2014a. Titanosaurian sauropod dinosaurs from the Latest
> Cretaceous of Pakistan. In Abstract Volume of 2nd symposium of
> International Geoscience Program 608 (IGCP 608) “Cretaceous Ecosystem of
> Asia and Pacific”, September 04-06, Tokyo, Japan, 108-111.
>
> That does not count as published. ICZN:
>
> "*Article 9
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__code.iczn.org_criteria-2Dof-2Dpublication_article-2D9-2Dwhat-2Ddoes-2Dnot-2Dconstitute-2Dpublished-2Dwork_&d=DwMBaQ&c=clK7kQUTWtAVEOVIgvi0NU5BOUHhpN0H8p7CSfnc_gI&r=Ry_mO4IFaUmGof_Yl9MyZgecRCKHn5g4z1CYJgFW9SI&m=8HJkUE6Gs7wSWvud-vbP4vBQa58i1Vo70TILob2u244&s=5L8DmQ4SBxYhgP5FpzhwxH1_-8ZBrTlX20m2QCAVh-w&e=>.
> What does not constitute published work*
>
> Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 8, none of the following
> constitutes published work within the meaning of the Code:
> [...]
>
> 9.10. materials issued primarily to participants at meetings (e.g.
> symposia, colloquia, congresses, or workshops), including abstracts and
> texts of presentations or posters;"
>
> The names proposed there were described at more length in the following
> work, which can be downloaded from ResearchGate (and nowhere else):
>
> Malkani, M.S. (2015) Dinosaurs, Mesoeucrocodiles, Pterosaurs, New Fauna
> and Flora from Pakistan. Geological Survey of Pakistan, Information Release
> No. 823, 1-32.
>
> I doubt that counts as published either. (The electronic version does not:
> it does not contain any evidence of having been registered in ZooBank. I
> doubt there's a paper version that can be acquired other than by walking
> into the Geological Survey of Pakistan.) But even if it does, the names in
> it still aren't made valid thereby. The reason is ICZN Art. 16.1
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__code.iczn.org_chapter-2D4-2Dcriteria-2Dof-2Davailability_article-2D16-2Dnames-2Dpublished-2Dafter-2D1999_-23art-2D16-2D1&d=DwMBaQ&c=clK7kQUTWtAVEOVIgvi0NU5BOUHhpN0H8p7CSfnc_gI&r=Ry_mO4IFaUmGof_Yl9MyZgecRCKHn5g4z1CYJgFW9SI&m=8HJkUE6Gs7wSWvud-vbP4vBQa58i1Vo70TILob2u244&s=YEm3PoCu6WjdoYlcIiDXHRBDPjOP7TJZjZQ9I_GMoHQ&e=>
> :
>
>
> "Every new name published after 1999, including new replacement names
> (nomina nova), must be explicitly indicated as intentionally new."
>
> That isn't done there (or in the articles in the Open Journal of Geology
> for that matter), instead the abstract from 2014a is cited, and that work
> does not count as published. Game Over theme of Super Mario Land
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__youtu.be_RiLQbORTTK8-3Ft-3D49&d=DwMBaQ&c=clK7kQUTWtAVEOVIgvi0NU5BOUHhpN0H8p7CSfnc_gI&r=Ry_mO4IFaUmGof_Yl9MyZgecRCKHn5g4z1CYJgFW9SI&m=8HJkUE6Gs7wSWvud-vbP4vBQa58i1Vo70TILob2u244&s=8HXrBOSuwqKt6qdNIiIq7MXQgqB2FE3QP_63Kv7kUzc&e=>
> up until the time somebody publishes the names anew, claiming they're new,
> in an available publication.
>
> The DOI has nothing to do with any of that, BTW; it's not mentioned
> anywhere in the Code.
>