DO NOT EDIT THIS PAGE!! This page is automatically generated by PageComment macro.
,0 FranciscoWelterSchultes 2009-02-17 04:28:00 Art. 80 should be modified, removing the List of Available Names in Zoology concept. Art. 80.6.5 and Art. 80.8 should be removed, Art. 80 and 80.6.2 should be modified accordingly. I believe it would also be necessary to get rid of the Official Lists. The Official List contains choiceless and conceptless a variety of names, normally available names being either currently used for taxa, or junior synonyms, and officially validated names which were previously unavailable. A name that is regularly available does not need to be mentioned on such a list. A validated name has become available by the corresponding act by the Commission, its presence on the List does not need to be mandatory. The Official Index is a useful list, but should be regarded rather as a useful documentation of Declarations and Opinions.
,0 FranciscoWelterSchultes 2010-07-20 19:31:13 A new Art. 80.10 should be added. 80.10. Ineffective decisions by the Commission. If a decision was taken by the Commission that was not in accordance with the provisions of the Code and/or not within the limits of its power as specified in this chapter, this decision is to be regarded as ineffective. It seems to me that such an article is necessary. Commissioners have argued "the Commission can take any nomenclatural decision they like and do not have to justify their actions to anyone", disacknowledging that the powers of the Commission are specified and limited in this chapter and that the Commission is not allowed to go beyond. This was not only little sensitive, but in a situation in which Commissioners are not elected in a direct and democratic way by those who have to accept the decisions, raised also the need to set a limit.
,0 FranciscoWelterSchultes 2011-02-17 18:00:59 Art. 80.4 should be expanded. Art. 80.4.1. All type species mentioned in the Official List are deemed to have been fixed under the plenary powers. Example: Viviparus Montfort 1810, type species given in Opinion 573 Helix vivpara Linnaeus, 1758 "by original designation". This was incorrect, Montfort designated Viviparus fluviorum as type and did not mention Helix vivipara. Type species shall be Helix vivipara fixed under the plenary powers. There are many cases where decisions on type species became outdated, creating unnecessary workload for the Commission. Usually the genera which were treated in the Opinions were important and their type species have been accepted by everyone. It makes no sense to force the community to ask the Commission to fix such errors. I recently submitted a long list for such corrections for European non-marine molluscs, if I extrapolate the workload to the rest of animals this will be much unnecessary work.
,0 FranciscoWelterSchultes 2011-02-17 18:59:59 Art. 80.4 should be expanded once more, if gender agreement is not abolished. Art. 80.4.2. Genders of all genera mentioned in the Official List shall be regarded as having been fixed under the plenary powers. Example: In Opinion 335 the genus Cecilioides Férussac 1814 (Gastropoda) was validated from a non-binominal work. The Commission regarded the genus as feminine. This was incorrect, it should have been masculine under Art. 30.1.4.4. The gender of Cecilioides is regarded to have been fixed as feminine under the plenary powers. It makes no sense to change a well established usage of genders. If a different gender is discovered for a well established genus, this can only create problems and has no benefit.
,on Jennah 2016-06-26 01:48:56 cambia su buena haha… No estoy de acuerdo con todo lo que dices, pero’ muchas personas ahora, ¿Por qué comprar’ la empresa’ &#n#p0;im2o8e&28221; un cierto tipo de objetos que se, de lo contrario se considera fuera…
,on Jenelle 2016-06-26 01:50:45 I have to say, the collection looks better from up close than on first sight! Not that I do7#;821n&t like it but I think the prints are more interesting than the looks itself!