Re: New Shandong Dinosaur Discoveries

[Tim Williams <tijawi@yahoo.com>]

David Marjanovic wrote:


> A ceratopsid* in Asia is already cool enough!


Yes, especially as it seems to be incontrovertibly ceratopsid.  Not sure where 
the Uzbek "ceratopsid"_Turanoceratops_ fits these days.  Alifanov (2008) 
maintains it as a valid ceratopsid, but other workers have treated is as a 
non-ceratopsid neoceratopsian (as well as a nomen dubium).  The material is 
probably too meager to be confident either way.  


> * Which reminds me: the temnospondyl workers switched all
> -opsidae/-opsoidea names to -opidae/-opoidea maybe 10 or 15
> years ago, and nobody seems to complain...


I'm not too bothered by etymological correctness.  I'll just settle for 
consistency.  It's a little off-putting to see Ceratopsidae and 
Leptoceratopsidae alongside Bagaceratopidae (no 's').  For some reason, having 
both Archaeopterygidae and Caudipteridae is unfortunate.  I just call the 
latter clade Caudipterygidae, and the ICZN be blown. 



Cheers

Tim