Taxacom: Formation of family name in zoology, based on genus ending -ops

[Francisco Welter-Schultes]

What a pity! I was already looking forward to see an incorrectly formed 
-opsidae name, and now this...

But Ceratopsidae saves it:

Ceratopsidae Marsh, 1888, based on Ceratops Marsh, 1888, original 
spelling formed not in accord with Art. 29.1.

https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.biodiversitylibrary.org%2Fitem%2F124084%23page%2F546%2Fmode%2F1up&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7Ce8c46bcf899e489c0d8408db088c937c%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638113172216218896%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=2eMSS%2FBNJsYkl9ObhvrEz%2Ftmy84avVdiuDgZRAgfxEA%3D&reserved=0

Name is frequently used as Ceratopsidae, but occasionally Ceratopidae is 
suggested as correct.

Best wishes
Francisco

Am 06.02.2023 um 18:58 schrieb Tony Rees:
> OK, since Laurent has shown us that the original spelling is Gorgonopidae
> (which probably I should have checked for earlier - my apologies for not
> doing so), then I guess that should be maintained unless Gorgonopsidae (per
> Benton) can be shown to be in prevailing usage by a significant margin,
> which it probably can not... therefore I feel safe in going with
> Gorgonopidae, and will change the entries in my database to that effect...
> unless anyone has suggestions to the contrary of course.
> 
> There do seem to have been some side issues thrown up by this discussion
> regarding particular articles in the Code which I trust have not been
> unhelpful and of course can be discussed further if not yet considered
> resolved.
> 
> Regards - Tony
> 
> Tony Rees, New South Wales, Australia
> https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2FTonyRees&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7Ce8c46bcf899e489c0d8408db088c937c%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638113172216218896%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=OkMGyk2dhJRJx6Dn1aLV1wwoj73PRPqIJ48si29bWPg%3D&reserved=0
> 
> On Tue, 7 Feb 2023 at 04:21, Laurent Raty via Taxacom <taxacom at lists.ku.edu>
> wrote:
> 
>> On 2/6/23 15:21, Francisco Welter-Schultes via Taxacom wrote:
>>
>>> And so Gorgonopsidae would have to be used. If Gorgonopidae would be
>>> in prevailing usage, then I would recommend to maintain using that
>>> spelling, otherwise I would currently recommend to stick to the
>>> original formation.
>>>
>>> Sorry not to have researched that immediately. I took a note that in
>>> the Code-5 revision we will have to look at this.
>>>
>>> Tony: do you have an online link to Lydekker 1890 (if possible, BHL)?
>>
>>
>> Lydekker 1890 is probably this :
>>
>> https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.biodiversitylibrary.org%2Fpage%2F40598819&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7Ce8c46bcf899e489c0d8408db088c937c%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638113172216218896%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=ihIrPKiodLxqAv7AUQ%2BsErazZFN%2FtO11XKcmJnMIKd8%3D&reserved=0
>>   .
>>
>> Unless there are known issues with the dates states in the works, this
>> may be preceded by Lydekker 1889, though :
>>
>> https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.biodiversitylibrary.org%2Fpage%2F40450323&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7Ce8c46bcf899e489c0d8408db088c937c%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638113172216218896%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=4zzZVrws9UKyzJrrUjZ5sEnng94t46tXXjhQ5HdqJEs%3D&reserved=0
>>   .
>>
>> Anyway, in both cases, the name was spelled Gorgonopidae, not
>> Gorgonopsidae.
>>
>> Cheers, L -
>>
> 
> 
>>
>>
>