This article is part of WikiProject Fishes, an attempt to organise a detailed guide to all topics related to Fish taxa. To participate, you can edit the attached article, or contribute further at WikiProject Fishes. This project is an offshoot of the WikiProject Tree of Life.FishesWikipedia:WikiProject FishesTemplate:WikiProject FishesFishes
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Palaeontology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of palaeontology-related topics and create a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PalaeontologyWikipedia:WikiProject PalaeontologyTemplate:WikiProject PalaeontologyPalaeontology
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
There is actually no requirement to list authorships following taxon names. This convention only applies to the level of family and below (as per the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature). That said, there's value in citing the concept for a given taxon, as is done here. The trouble is, the normal convention for citing authorships is to provide authorships in parentheses only when the name has undergone a change; in contrast, if the name is the same as originally formed, the authorship is not to be given in parentheses. So, the fact that all authorships are here given in parentheses could be confusing - in fact, parentheses are meaningless in the sense I've described, since there is no such thing as priority or really even authorship for taxa above the family level. Therefore, since the "authorships" here serve only as references to the works in which these taxa were proposed, they should ideally be formatted the same way as any other reference, and listed at the end of the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SKMonckton (talk • contribs) 17:14, 2 December 2017 (UTC)Reply
