Taxacom: Order Anura - correct authorship?

[Stephen Thorpe]

 One could disambiguate homonyms in other ways, e.g. Decapoda (Crustacea) vs. Decapoda (Cephalopoda). What you actually need is a separate disambiguation field associated with each name in your database. Sometimes, you can disambiguate by author, sometimes by parent taxon or anything else that does the job.Stephen
    On Thursday, 23 February 2023 at 04:34:57 pm NZDT, Tony Rees <tonyrees49 at gmail.com> wrote:  
 
 Hi Stephen, once again I agree with you to a point, but then differ: for example, it is a fact that?Blackburn & Wake, 2011 cite the order as Anura
Fischer von Waldheim, 1813. So one could give (on WikiXXX if desired) a particular authorship "according to [wherever]"; and note any alternative views as published. Just my take of course. Sometimes it becomes important, for example according to my recollection there are 2 different orders Decapoda, one a Crustacean group in current use, the other something else (cephalopods? cannot remember), so once again authorship of the name in question is a desirable feature.
Regards - Tony

On Thu, 23 Feb 2023 at 12:52, Stephen Thorpe <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz> wrote:

 The problem with putting your preferred authorship on names like Anura on Wikimedia is that your?preferred authorship is just that and not an objective fact because there is no such thing as authorship for such names. It is a common misconception, but a misconception nonetheless. There are no codified rules to define the authorship of such names. Nothing to say that the authorship is the first author. Nothing to say that the work in which the name was published must be published according to the Code, etc., etc. It is all just pointless dust in the wind.Stephen