[Taxacom] OMG! DNA only descriptions! - Round Two

[Carlos Alberto Martínez Muñoz]

Dear Dr. Penev,
1) I am "Mr. Martínez" or "Mr. Martínez Muñoz" if you prefer.

2) You can use "involve" instead of "notifying" if that is your preference.
I have notified issues to Pensoft to introduce improvements, even without
being an author, and I have done that privately, because quality matters.
Three of my notifications were sent yesterday and they have already been
forwarded to the production team to improve a published paper. I have also
tested and submitted a user experience about OpenBiodiv before. I have
privately notified when automatic notifications of new papers, based on
taxa annotation, have not worked. The finding of “errors” in the ISSN
listing of the journals was not directed towards unavailability topics (as
I clearly marked it as a separate topic), but it was in line with my
history of feedbacks to Pensoft. So Pensoft have benefitted from my
feedbacks a number of times. You can call that "involving", if you wish.

3) You mixed name availability and name validity in the same sentence and
they are not the same thing. You are right that it has not been proven that
the names are unavailable... yet. The best part of the discussion is
reserved for future e-mails, but if there was no Code-compliant printed
version, then it was not necessary to discuss what I will have to discuss
in future e-mails. No worries, that part certainly does not concern to
Pensoft and you won't be CC'ed.

4) "The availability of names published in that particular DEZ paper has
been discussed in this email thread already." That is totally true. And
from that discussion it is evident that:
4.A) The ZooBank IDs of the DEZ paper itself was IMPROPERLY registered and
that the names published in the e-version are UNAVAILABLE in the sense of
the Code. The e-version does not comply with article 8.5.3.1. It seems that
you missed that essential part of the discussion.
4.B) Until today that it was unclear if the printed version of DEZ was
Code-compliant. Now we know that it is and that the correct date of the
names is December 2019 and NOT July 25, 2019. Thank you! The homepage of
the journal could be improved by including the dates on which issues are
printed.
4.C) By combination of 3.A and 3.B, hence my insistence, which was not only
mine and which indeed involves Pensoft because it was a member of your
staff who made the ZooBank registration.

5) "As an aside note, the question on re-reimbursement is also irrelevant,
because DEZ (as well as quite many other journals in Pensoft's portfolio)
is a platinum open access journal, which means free to publish and free to
read."
I know what is platinum open access and I have been the person advising my
university to include it in the teaching of "Information Resources and
Tools for Research" since 2018. Thank you.
Now sorry but no, the DEZ is not platinum OA. "The publication of 400 pages
a year is generously supported by the Museum für Naturkunde, Berlin." (
https://dez.pensoft.net/about#ArticleProcessingCharges). That the journal
reaches those 400 pages or not, is a different thing. For production
mistakes made within those 400 pages, Pensoft is of course most welcome to
refund the MfN Berlin instead of individual authors.

6) Thank you for your clarifications regarding post-publication edits. I
still expect Pensoft to find a way to keep original versions online for
public scrutiny. Zenodo could be a solution.

Have a good evening,

Carlos A. Martínez Muñoz
Zoological Museum, Biodiversity Unit
FI-20014 University of Turku
Finland
ResearchGate profile
<https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Carlos_Martinez-Munoz>
Myriapod Morphology and Evolution
<https://www.facebook.com/groups/205802113162102/>




El lun., 10 feb. 2020 a las 17:43, Lyubomir Penev (<lyubo.penev at gmail.com>)
escribió:

> Mr.  Muñoz,
>
> Your persistence in trying to involve Pensoft in a public discussion
> relatеd to a whole bunch of issues on electronic publishing of
> nomenclatural acts is indeed impressive. Such an insistence to speak “on
> behalf of the community” might be understood and interpreted in different
> ways, but since you have fixed even a deadline for answer and have used
> expressions like “..*on how fast unavailable names spread to online
> databases in the Internet Era, specially when they are published in
> journals like Pensoft's*”, I feel I owe you some comments, even because
> the readers might become misled by this thread.
>
> In the era of electronic communication, not answering an email can mean
> different things. In this particular case, the reasons are probably simpler
> than one would expect:
>
> 1. The availability of names published in that particular DEZ paper has
> been discussed in this email thread already. Nothing of what you bring as a
> reasoning proves that the new taxa are invalidly published, hence
> unavailable.
>
> 2. All, but one of the many questions you have imposed in relation to that
> article are actually irrelevant to it, hence not attended.
>
> Please find my comments below and let me start with your last question:
>
>   "8) If I am an author and the e-version of my paper is incorrectly
> registered in ZooBank by Pensoft and therefore unavailable, am I entitled
> to a refund? If so, how much?"
>
> All ZooBank IDs in that DEZ paper have been properly registered (with the
> correct spelling of the UUIDs!) on 22nd of July 2019 and the article itself
> was published on 25th of July, otherwise they wouldn't be present in the
> article. As an aside note, the question on re-reimbursement is also
> irrelevant, because DEZ (as well as quite many other journals in Pensoft's
> portfolio) is a platinum open access journal, which means free to publish
> and free to read.
>
> The questions on printing is also irrelevant to this particular case,
> because Article 21.9 of the Code reads: "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 articles
> in DEZ are published when they are ready for that, that is each article
> bears its own and only one publication date, which is the date of the
> online publication. Published articles are printed and bound together in 50
> copies in May and December. The copies are delivered to the Library of the
> Natural History Museum Berlin and used for their own purposes, including
> inter-library exchange.
>
> Immutability is an important question, I agree, although and again, it is
> irrelevant to the availability of names in that paper, simply because the
> Code states "immutability" as a recommendation (8D) but not as a mandatory
> requirement.
>
> The finding of “errors” in the ISSN listing of the journals is irrelevant
> either, because the journals inherit two different series of the
> “Mitteilungen aus dem Museum für Naturkunde in Berlin” (there is also a
> third one inherited by the journal Fossil Record).
>
>
> Now probably the most important part of the discussion comes. It is OUT OF
> QUESTION that substantial changes ("inadmissible" errors in terms of the
> Code) to an already published article should be introduced through
> separately published corrigenda. Such examples are changes in authorship,
> significant additions or corrections to the content that might change the
> conclusions, etc., let alone changes concerning nomenclature. Anyone who
> has published with Pensoft and requested a corrigendum knows how we deal
> with this kind of issues. Correcting small "admissible" errors (for
> example, broken links, or a forgotten grant number in otherwise fully
> spelled grant acknowledgement) is something that deserves a separate
> discussion. For this kind of ever increasing correction requests, deriving
> in the vast majority of cases from the authors –  irrespective of the fact
> that manuscripts normally go through several proof checks until authors
> confirm their readiness for publication! – publishers follow their
> established standards.
>
> How to distinguish between both types of errors and how to correct these?
> At Pensoft, our policy was to correct small, "admissible" typographical or
> typesetting errors either through online annotations on the published
> version (for example through our Comments functionality or through
> hypothes.is services), which can be done by the authors themselves, or
> through corrections in the published PDF. In order to avoid any possibility
> of misinterpretation of our policies for Corrigenda and Errata, we have
> introduced some changes in the Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement
> across all journals which makes the procedure strict, explicit and
> transparent. An example on how this procedure has been implemented recently
> is available here <https://zookeys.pensoft.net/article/36563/list/21/>.
>
> To shed light on what actually happened with the publication in question:
> Two purely technical corrections have indeed been made in the first PDF
> version of the paper a couple of days after publication. The corrections
> are: a double "//" in one of the ZooBank ID was corrected to a single "/"
> and a superfluous space after https://zoobank.org/ was removed in a
> second one. Both errors only break the hyperlinks of fully spelled and
> correctly registered ZooBank registration numbers. Also, the numbering in
> the header on odd pages has been corrected from 119–146 to 119–145 (on
> the first page of the publication the numbering was correct).
>
> With this I hope I have answered your questions.
>
> Best regards,
>
> L.Penev
>
> -----
> Prof. Dr. Lyubomir Penev
> ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2186-5033
> WoS ResearcherID: O-9982-2019
> <https://publons.com/researcher/324250/lyubomir-penev/>
> Founder and CEO
> Pensoft Publishers <http://pensoft.net>
> ARPHA Journal Publishing Platform <http://arphahub.com>
> 13a Geo Milev Street
> 1111 Sofia, Bulgaria
> Tel +359-2-8704281
> Fax +359-2-8704282
> Publishing services for journals <http://arphahub.com/about/services> I
> Journals <http://journals.pensoft.net> I Books
> <http://pensoft.net/books-published-by-Pensoft>
> Services for scientific projects <http://pensoft.net/projects>
> Find us on: Facebook
> <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Pensoft-Publishers/170816832934216?ref=ts>,
> Google+
> <https://plus.google.com/u/0/b/114819936210826038991/114819936210826038991/posts>,
> Twitter  <https://twitter.com/#%21/Pensoft>
>
>
> On Sat, Feb 8, 2020 at 3:30 PM Carlos Alberto Martínez Muñoz via Taxacom <
> taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu> wrote:
>
>> Dear Dr. Zimmermann,
>> Please note that you have not acknowledged receipt of my formal inquiry to
>> DEZ on editorial matters, dated 21.ii.2020 and addressing the now
>> longstanding issue of DEZ printed edition being Code-compliant or not. I
>> remind you that this question dates back to 23.xii.2019. I consider that I
>> have been kindly patient, expecting for a confirmation of receipt for 18
>> days and for a clear answer for almost seven weeks now. I assume that as
>> the EiC, you represent DEZ's commitment to data quality stewardship and
>> that you are knowledgeable enough to fully understand the threat that
>> unavailable names represent for Nomenclature and Taxonomy. I also assume
>> that you are fully aware on how fast unavailable names spread to online
>> databases in the Internet Era, specially when they are published in
>> journals like Pensoft's. Your long silence is therefore inexplicable to
>> me.
>> Please, acknowledge receipt of this email and provide a clear reply during
>> this week.
>> Yours sincerely,
>>
>> Carlos A. Martínez Muñoz
>> Zoological Museum, Biodiversity Unit
>> FI-20014 University of Turku
>> Finland
>> ResearchGate profile
>> <https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Carlos_Martinez-Munoz>
>> Myriapod Morphology and Evolution
>> <https://www.facebook.com/groups/205802113162102/>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Taxacom Mailing List
>>
>> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>> For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, 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
>> The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at:
>> http://taxacom.markmail.org
>>
>> Nurturing nuance while assaulting ambiguity for about 33 years, 1987-2020.
>>
>