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

Over the years I've had the privilege of naming quite a few genera and species (all in the sphere of microbiology, rather than zoology or paleontology), with more in the pipeline.Â In all cases, I've put quite a lot of time and thought into these names.Â (I can relate to Mike's word "marinate".)Â Whenever I've been uncertain about how a particular Greek or Latin word should be combined, I've consulted with an expert (as Ben Creisler can attest!).Â I've never understood why everyone doesn't do this.Â There are so many BAD names out there.

On Sun, Jul 26, 2020 at 2:21 AM Yazbeck, Thomas <yazbeckt@msu.edu> wrote:

I'm curious about why the authors of Oculudentavis (just typing it feels awful...) didn't realize how bad a name it was. Couldn't somebody have spent an hour making sure it was at least linguistically correct? I'm not a professional paleontologist/zoologist - how long does it typically take to come up with a name for a new taxon?

Thomas Yazbeck

From: dinosaur-l-request@mymaillists.usc.edu <dinosaur-l-request@mymaillists.usc.edu> on behalf of Paul P <turtlecroc@yahoo.com>
Sent: Friday, July 24, 2020 2:41 AM
To: mickey_mortimer111@msn.com <mickey_mortimer111@msn.com>; Gregory Paul <gsp1954@aol.com>
Cc: dinosaur-l@usc.edu <dinosaur-l@usc.edu>
Subject: Re: [dinosaur] RETRACTION: Oculudentavis, new smallest known Mesozoic bird in amber from Cretaceous of Myanmar
Â

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.

ÂÂÂ Paul P.