Valid in name only?

[Christopher Taylor <ck.taylor@auckland.ac.nz>]

Following on from the recent debate about the validity of certain
privately-published publications, I ask this probably pointless but
potentially interesting question, which will at least bring attention back
to one of the more (ahem) "overlooked" authors to publish on dinosaurs:
    Is Chasmosaurus minilorientalus Okamura 1980 (correct publication date?)
a validly published name? Note that I'm asking only about validity of the
*name*, not of the organism. After all, it has a figured type specimen
(although no depository is named), and the basis for its distinction from
other species is pretty clear ;-D.

    Cheers,

        Christopher Taylor