Talk:Pricesaurus

Pedantic issue

"Pricesaurus (meaning "Llewellyn Price's lizard)"" - No it doesn't. It means "Price's lizard". Or possibly "[Llewellyn] Price's lizard". But not "Llewellyn Price's lizard". Yours pedantically, --Dweller (talk) 11:25, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

To be even more pedantic (I'm very good at that): if the "Price" is Llewellyn Ivor Price then "Price's Lizard" is by implication "Llewellyn Ivor Price's Lizard" also. It all depends on what level of interpretation you care to apply.--MWAK (talk) 06:10, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Pricesaurus is not a nomen nudum

Traditionally Pricesaurus has been considered a nomen nudum because it was assumed the naming abstract did not contain a sufficient description. However, the 2012 study by Pinheiro shows that in 1986 a diagnosis was in fact given. Pinheiro claimed it was still a nomen nudum because the diagnosis was not actually diagnostic but this is irrelevant: this merely makes it a nomen dubium. Also Pinheiro seems to refer to article 9.9 of the ICZN, which holds that names in abstracts are invalid — however this is only true if the abstracts were mainly printed to be distributed among the participants of the congress during which the lecture was presented. In this case however, the abstracts were published in a regular magazine, Ciência e Cultura. Therefore Pricesauris is apparently not a nomem nudum and the scare quotes (perhaps not reflecting standard taxonomic typography anyway) are out of place.--MWAK (talk) 06:10, 2 April 2013 (UTC)