 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taxobox
editGingerich (2007) considers "Zeuglodon" brachyspondylus a possible species of Masracetus based on comparisons of the syntypes with Masracetus. As Z. brachyspondylus and Pontogeneus priscus are nomina dubia, the species name in the taxobox should be changed to Pontogeneus priscus Leidy 1852.
Gingerich, Philip D (2007). "Stromerius nidensis, new archaeocete (Mammalia, Cetacea) from the Upper Eocene Qasr El-Sagha Formation, Fayum, Egypt". Contributions from the Museum of Paleontology 31 (13): 363–78. OCLC 214233870. 68.4.28.33 (talk) 15:51, 31 July 2013 (UTC)Vahe Demirjian
Nomen nudum?
editIt seems there might be a mistake here. Sure it isn't nomen dubium that is meant? FunkMonk (talk) 03:18, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
- According to the taxonomic history on Paleodb:
- Pontogeneus was named by Leidy (1852) [Sepkoski's age data: T Eo-u]. It is not extant.
- It was synonymized subjectively with Zeuglodon by Bronn (1853); it was synonymized subjectively with Dorudon by Trouessart (1904); it was considered a nomen nudum by Uhen (2005).
- --Fama Clamosa (talk) 03:27, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
- Ok, but then the article seems to be describing it in a weird way, "Uhen 2005 designated Pontogeneus priscus to be a nomen nudum based on the very limited type specimen." A nomen nudum is a name that has not been properly published, the completeness is irrelevant. The above section seems to indicate it is a nomen dubium as well. So not sure what's going on here. And in any case, if it's a junior synonym of Dorudon, why keep the article separate? FunkMonk (talk) 03:38, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
- From the article history, it looks like Uhen added that information himself (November 2011). Uhen 2005 is not available to me, but I assume that Pontogeneus is nudum because no published work adequately describes the distinguishing characters of a separate genus or species. I recently moved some content related to Albert Koch's "Hydrarchos" from Basilosaurus to this page. I have also expanded on the taxonomic history of Dorudon. all of this is obviously related, but I'm not sure (1) Pontogeneus deserves a separate page (except perhaps to house the story of Albert Koch) or (2) where to put the information instead. --Fama Clamosa (talk) 04:00, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
- Heheh, that is quite complex, especially that Uhen apparently edited this himself... But I agree that if itis a dubious name, not a junior synonym, it warrants an article. FunkMonk (talk) 04:06, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
- Yes, very confusing indeed. I invited Uhen to participate in this discussion. Hopefully he will be able to clear things out. --Fama Clamosa (talk) 16:48, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
- Heheh, that is quite complex, especially that Uhen apparently edited this himself... But I agree that if itis a dubious name, not a junior synonym, it warrants an article. FunkMonk (talk) 04:06, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
- From the article history, it looks like Uhen added that information himself (November 2011). Uhen 2005 is not available to me, but I assume that Pontogeneus is nudum because no published work adequately describes the distinguishing characters of a separate genus or species. I recently moved some content related to Albert Koch's "Hydrarchos" from Basilosaurus to this page. I have also expanded on the taxonomic history of Dorudon. all of this is obviously related, but I'm not sure (1) Pontogeneus deserves a separate page (except perhaps to house the story of Albert Koch) or (2) where to put the information instead. --Fama Clamosa (talk) 04:00, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
- Ok, but then the article seems to be describing it in a weird way, "Uhen 2005 designated Pontogeneus priscus to be a nomen nudum based on the very limited type specimen." A nomen nudum is a name that has not been properly published, the completeness is irrelevant. The above section seems to indicate it is a nomen dubium as well. So not sure what's going on here. And in any case, if it's a junior synonym of Dorudon, why keep the article separate? FunkMonk (talk) 03:38, 26 August 2013 (UTC)