tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3248412803814730250.post3031666116790398332..comments2024-03-17T01:48:59.504-07:00Comments on The Theropod Database Blog: Theropod Database information on "Ingenia" published! ... by someone elseMickey Mortimerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08831823442911513851noreply@blogger.comBlogger14125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3248412803814730250.post-76434743562061111042014-03-03T00:11:01.774-08:002014-03-03T00:11:01.774-08:00Well Mickey, at least already knew and the news sp...Well Mickey, at least already knew and the news spread. And there would be another good idea that removing this name will be created and ethical issues do not interfere with the taxonomic?<br /><br />At least I hope I do not make mistakes so outrageous fan (this was a plagiarism), as people try to advise or counsel me occasionally see my work before publishing anything.Pixagonohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18195814903551576172noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3248412803814730250.post-74018607718879219512013-11-21T09:52:06.116-08:002013-11-21T09:52:06.116-08:00If Barsbold and his ilk take note of the fact that...If Barsbold and his ilk take note of the fact that Ingenia has been renamed Ajancingenia, then they may erect Ajancingeniinae as a replacement name for Ingeniinae when they publish a new paper about a new genus of ingeniine from the Bayan Shireh Formation. A similar situation happened when the family group name Ctenosauridae Kuhn 1961 was changed to Ctenosauriscidae Kuhn, 1964 because Ctenosaurus had been renamed Ctenosauriscus.Davidowhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06099864739987549261noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3248412803814730250.post-90901272308404101792013-11-20T19:10:08.006-08:002013-11-20T19:10:08.006-08:001) Yes, Barsbold made this easier by not acting fa...1) Yes, Barsbold made this easier by not acting faster.<br /><br />2) And I would have refused based on the ethics of renaming Barsbold's genus without his consent. Also, the name's terrible and I would have insisted on a better figure and the right subfamily name. The half of the text not based on my data does seem decent though. I haven't checked its accuracy, but it is detailed and up to date. Mickey Mortimerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08831823442911513851noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3248412803814730250.post-1917687353281479802013-11-20T16:47:23.905-08:002013-11-20T16:47:23.905-08:00Indeed, this very article contains a website in it...Indeed, this very article contains a website in its references (the Paleobiology Database). While Mike Taylor specified removing "a citation to a blog post", note it was to the systematics portion of website, not this blog portion.<br /><br />Also note I was unclear in my post because I was basing the wording in that paragraph on what Easter said commenting at Jaime's blog. Easter said "the editor", but the editor himself has specified to me the recommendation to remove references to The Theropod Database was made by "the referees". Whether it was one of the referees or both of them, I don't know. Similarly, I don't know how aware the editor was of this recommendation prior to my email. Unfortunately he doesn't share Mike Taylor's ideals on transparency in review, so I've found it impossible to learn many details.Mickey Mortimerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08831823442911513851noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3248412803814730250.post-72141861556679931562013-11-20T16:14:05.627-08:002013-11-20T16:14:05.627-08:00I have seen websites cited in other Zootaxa articl...I have seen websites cited in other Zootaxa articles, so I don't think that it's a blanket policy. However, Zootaxa has a large number of editors, so if it was an editorial decision to remove the reference, it may have been due to the individual editor that handled this manuscript.Christopher Taylorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11075565866351612441noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3248412803814730250.post-27959375991120046532013-11-20T04:09:17.638-08:002013-11-20T04:09:17.638-08:00One other thing emerges from this mess:
It is fla...One other thing emerges from this mess:<br /><br />It is flat-out <i>moronic</i> for a journal to strike out a citation to a blog post. It's loss of information. We're scientists, and information is our currency. The idea that it's OK to cite a pers. comm. (which can NEVER be looked up) but not a blog post (which may one day become lost) is so wrong-headed I hardly know where to start.<br /><br />So I won't be publishing at Zootaxa till they fix that policy.Mike Taylorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06039663158335543317noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3248412803814730250.post-23451553926917141142013-11-19T19:11:12.853-08:002013-11-19T19:11:12.853-08:00Publication of Ajancingenia doesn't automatica...Publication of <i>Ajancingenia</i> doesn't automatically create Ajancingeniinae. 'Ingeniinae' remains without a valid name, unless there is a junior synonym based on some other genus that comes forward to replace it.Christopher Taylorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11075565866351612441noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3248412803814730250.post-51236579129585794682013-11-19T17:20:30.805-08:002013-11-19T17:20:30.805-08:00Oops, sorry. Corrected that.
The fact Easter edi...Oops, sorry. Corrected that.<br /><br />The fact Easter edited the post without any obvious evidence the Barsbold section was changed doesn't reflect well on his innocence. Nick and I have screenshots and web archives of the two versions, which are important now that the post has been removed.<br /><br />http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://www.thefossilforum.com/index.php?/topic/42171-ingenia-gets-a-new-name/<br /><br />http://www.webcitation.org/query?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thefossilforum.com%2Findex.php%3F%2Ftopic%2F42171-ingenia-gets-a-new-name%2F&date=2013-11-19Mickey Mortimerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08831823442911513851noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3248412803814730250.post-35273963502314512102013-11-19T17:01:03.385-08:002013-11-19T17:01:03.385-08:00A few points:
(1) Barsbold had ages to publish a ...A few points:<br /><br />(1) Barsbold had ages to publish a replacement name for the preoccupied Ingenia. All he needed to do was publish a brief note, as was done with Diceratops. This kind of claim-jumping by Easter was a disaster waiting to happen.<br /><br />(2) Mickey, you should have been offered co-authorship. As Mike says, this is a low act. <br /><br />(3) Does the subfamily really automatically become Ajancingeniinae (in place of Ingeniinae)? Someone could erect (for example) Conchoraptorinae or Heyuanninae for this clade.Timhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17837037454015036429noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3248412803814730250.post-1642675448573577042013-11-19T15:23:15.390-08:002013-11-19T15:23:15.390-08:00Perhaps you and Barsbold should submit a petition ...Perhaps you and Barsbold should submit a petition to the ICZN to formally suppress "Ajancingenia"?Bradhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15613329277334129312noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3248412803814730250.post-22281747245612548072013-11-19T14:04:35.515-08:002013-11-19T14:04:35.515-08:00Mike Taylor noted this back in 2004
Not Mike, but...<i>Mike Taylor noted this back in 2004</i><br /><br />Not Mike, but Christopher ;-). I've got quite a list of preoccupied taxa that I've come across, as it happens: I could make myself into the Özdikmen of the Antipodes. Also, note that the Fossil Forum post has been edited to say "after attempting to consult with Rinchen Barsbold".<br /><br />Ethical issues aside, the continued use of 'Ingeniinae' in a paper renaming <i>Ingenia</i> is just face-palmworthy.<br /><br />Christopher Taylorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11075565866351612441noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3248412803814730250.post-3110744968769823742013-11-19T13:46:23.379-08:002013-11-19T13:46:23.379-08:00'but 100 years from now Easter (2013) will be ...'but 100 years from now Easter (2013) will be seen as a pretty good paper finally renaming "Ingenia"'<br /><br />If we're still using binomial nomenclature 100 years from now I'm going to shoot myself. (Assuming I live to be 137 years old.)<br /><br />Seriously, though, this is low.<br /><br />Mike Keeseyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00147156174467903264noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3248412803814730250.post-19771103485580711792013-11-19T09:39:51.832-08:002013-11-19T09:39:51.832-08:00Since Ajancingenia was published in such a complet...Since Ajancingenia was published in such a completely unethical way, I'll avoid to mention it in my publications. Period.Andrea Cauhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10855060597677361866noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3248412803814730250.post-16328124878430875952013-11-19T08:48:21.246-08:002013-11-19T08:48:21.246-08:00This comment has been removed by the author.Nickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08718847558790015112noreply@blogger.com