"

= More a fault of interpretation  

Mr Shyamal, 

In your answer, one notices very well that you still made an error, because you fix yourselves on the imaginary scientific value of Rognes or of the americains, by hating the objective value of the other authors and in particular of Lehrer.  To better explain you the taxonomic situation of the kind Bengalia s. str., I request from you do not consider that I insult certain characters of current taxonomy and to see reality exactly exposed by me. 

No author who occupied himself more or less tangentially with Bengaliidae, admits that Bengalia testacea  R.D. is the species-type of the Bengalia kind.  Only Rognes, which copied Sabrosky (1999:62), which knew this group of dipterous in same measurement as Rognes, wrote (with the collaboration of bibliographical and nonscientific impostors:  Neal L Evenhuis and F.C. Thompson) that this type is the nomen nudum  B. testacea  indicated by Duponchel (1842)(?!).  Thus, which makes N.L Evenhuis, J. E. O' Hara, T. Pape and A. C. Pont are only of copy and to transcribe exactly the silly things of Sabrosky, without any proof or analyze scientific.  Moreover, because these authors are good friends with Rognes, it also added "" Valid genus [ tests  Rognes (2006:467) ] "", but not validates species-type.  But, can you say which tests was made by Rognes?,  who knows nothing on Bengaliidae, which made the most stupid silly things in its work, which does not know the morphological terminology of their genitalia male, which mixes the drawings of the authors for the different species to make its new taxa, which makes the photography of the microscopic preparations of the species studied by Lehrer and deposited in the Natural history museum of London and which affirms that those are clean taxonomic imaginations?  Don't you believe my assertions?  Then I recommend to you to read, for a good documentation of your encyclopaedia, work of Lehrer of his review Fragmenta Dipterologica:  2008(18):1-4;  2010(23):1-22 and 22-25; 2010(24):20-24 and 24-30;  2010(25):1-4 and work:  LEHRER & WEI, 2010, a new Eastern kind of the family Bengaliidae (Diptera) - Bull. Ploughshare ent.  Mulhouse, 66(2)21-25.  
Thus you can understand that Rognes is incomparable being unaware of, which wanted to make taxonomic "" revolutions "" with the language devoted to its handicapped pupils of the school of Stavanger (Norway) where it works and with the mystifications of literature and information.  Moreover, you can consider only the work of Evenhuis &Comp.;  of Zootaxa an authority in the taxonomy of Bengaliidae constitutes, because they never studied the species of the group and in particular ?, because all the authors, of Zumpt (1956) and until Lehrer (2010) consider that Bengalia labiata  R.D. is the species-type of the Bengalia kind.  If you want to mislead the readers, you are free to depreciate your Wikipedia.  

Bergamos, 10 seven.  2010"