Re: [dinosaur] RETRACTION: Oculudentavis, new smallest known Mesozoic bird in amber from Cretaceous of Myanmar

[Gregory Paul <gsp1954@aol.com>]

To be clear, having been publishing in the literature for nearly four decades of course I did not mean that the paper itself should be altered, that never happens and obviously would be absurd for a long list of reasons, and obviously no one would suggest doing such a radical thing. The O. k. paper should be reinstated as originally published with a quick correction note attached in some manner regarding the errant parts.  

GSPaul

-----Original Message-----
From: Paul P <turtlecroc@yahoo.com>
To: mickey_mortimer111@msn.com; Gregory Paul <gsp1954@aol.com>
Cc: dinosaur-l@usc.edu
Sent: Fri, Jul 24, 2020 2:41 am
Subject: Re: [dinosaur] RETRACTION: Oculudentavis, new smallest known Mesozoic bird in amber from Cretaceous of Myanmar

On Thursday, July 23, 2020, 05:15:17 PM UTC, Gregory Paul <gsp1954@aol.com> wrote:

> Me thinks this paper should be reinstated with a major correction to the errant parts.


Hmm, I found some small errors in one of my 2018 papers. Can I retract it now and then have a different version of it re-appear with the errors corrected..? Ach, but how to expunge the hardcopies from the printed version of the journal in university libraries all over the world..?

Yes I am being facetious (but I didn't get the impression that GSP was).

Again, a paper that's published cannot be 'disappeared.' It exists from now on, in perpetuity. That's the whole point of the new electronic publishing rules too.

It is a good point that it's a binomial name, and there's nothing wrong with the specific name. It's just that generic name which is going to win awards for being one of the worst of all time.

    Paul P.