[Taxacom] Questions about availability of a species name

[Stephen Thorpe]

You can't seriously make a distinction between "statement" and "statement in words"!! This proves my point about pointless "taxo-lawyering"!
Stephen

--------------------------------------------
On Thu, 23/8/18, Adam Cotton <adamcot at cscoms.com> wrote:

 Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Questions about availability of a species name
 To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
 Received: Thursday, 23 August, 2018, 11:48 PM
 
 ----- Original Message ----- 
 From: "Stephen Thorpe" <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>
 To: <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>;
 "Adam Cotton" <adamcot at cscoms.com>
 Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2018 4:21
 PM
 Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Questions about
 availability of a species name
 
 
 > (BMNH) isn't even a statement, but
 is at most an indication that the 
 > specimen is from BMNH, but the
 describing author may have the option of 
 > depositing the type elsewhere,
 even if it is from BMNH, so we cannot 
 > assume that the specimen will end
 up in the same collection from which the 
 > author received it.
 >
 >> "BMNH" already is a known name
 and  location of the depository, and thus 
 >> fulfils the second part
 > No it does not! The Code requires
 a a STATEMENT indicating the name and 
 > location of that collection! This
 is often given in the methods section of 
 > a paper, but sometimes not.
 >
 > Stephen
 >
 >
 
 
 Stephen,
 
 Here again I disagree. Article 16.4.2
 is different to other Code articles. 
 Other articles use the phrase
 "statement in words", whereas 16.4.2 only says 
 "statement". As a result I do not think
 that the statement has to be a 
 complete phrase or sentence.
 
 Most papers will give a lits of
 acronyms used, such as "BMNH = Natural 
 History Museum, London" or at least
 include such in brackets somewhere in 
 the text. If the information about the
 holotype states: "Holotype blah blah 
 [data] (BMNH)" that clearly means that
 the specimen is in BMNH, thus there 
 is a statement of location of the
 holotype included already, rather than 
 requiring a statement in words which
 would be necessary for instance when 
 giving the purported difference between
 the new taxon and previously 
 described related taxa.
 
 I do get your point that the specimen
 may have been borrowed from BMNH for 
 purposes of the research leading to the
 publication, but it is unlikely that 
 the author would not state this fact.
 
 Adam. 
 
 _______________________________________________
 Taxacom Mailing List
 Send Taxacom mailing list submissions
 to: Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
 
 http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
 The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be
 searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org
 To subscribe or unsubscribe via the
 Web, visit: http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
 You can reach the person managing the
 list at: taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
 
 Nurturing Nuance while Assaulting
 Ambiguity for 31 Some Years, 1987-2018.