Talk:Nothomyrmecia

message: I find it worth noting that (for such an obscure species, probably mainly of interest to specialists) Google finds *MANY* more cites of one than the other:
Results 1 - 10 of about 3,120 for "Nothomyrmecia macrops"
Results 1 - 10 of about 133 for "Prionomyrmex macrops"
I don't have the time to research authoritative sources myself and come to my own conclusion, but I certainly observe that there seem to be "authoritative" (at least, authoritative-looking!) websites on each side of the nomenclature, e.g...
N. macrops:
 http://www.ento.csiro.au/science/ants/nothomyrmeciinae/nothomyrmecia/nothomyrmecia.htm
 http://data.gbif.org/species/13713591
P. macrops:
 http://atbi.biosci.ohio-state.edu:210/hymenoptera/nomenclator.name_entry?text_entry=nothomyrmecia%20macrops
67.188.180.33 (talk) 14:41, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Nothomyrmecia or Prionomyrmex?

message: What is this story of bringing back an older version by merging again the two subfamilies Myrmeciinae and Prionomyrmecinae into one and reviving Nothomyrmecia as a valid genus?
Baroni Urbani (2005) separates the two subfamilies that are characterized respectively by four (Prionomyrmecinae) and seven (Myrmeciinae) synapomorphies.  
He shows also the inconsistency of the characters used to separate Nothomyrmecia from its senior synonym, Prionomyrmex.
There are no subsequent studies on the subject, even if Archibald et al. (2006) still adopt the wrong classification without justifying their attitude.  Archibald et al. (2006), however,  had no other alternative since no one of the subfamilial characters listed by Baroni Urbani (2005) is visible among their compression fossils.
WIKIPEDIA is not the place of personal opinions even if they were justified, which is not this case.
I’m re-correcting the relative entries until proof of the contrary. 
References:
Archibald, S. B., Cover, S. P., Moreau, C. S. 2006. Bulldog ants of the Eocene Okanagan Highlands and history of the subfamily (Hymenoptera: Formicidae: Myrmeciinae).  Annals of the Entomological Society of America 99: 487-523.
Baroni Urbani, C. 2005. Phylogeny and biogeography of the ant subfamily Prionomyrmecinae (Hymenoptera, Formicidae).  Annali del Museo Civico di Stortia Naturale “G. Doria” 96: 581-595.
Sirolo 15:20, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The above content was added by an editor who is suspected to be Baroni Urbani, the change proposed by this author was NOT accepted by the scientific community. It should also be noted that the Archibald et al paper does not use the taxonomy shown by this editor but instead uses the Nothomyrmecia/Myrmeciinae classification--Kevmin (talk) 06:26, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: move to Prionomyrmex

message: I am requesting this page be moved back to Nothomyrmecia.  Looking at the page history this page was moved to the current location after edits by the author of the paper synonymising the two genera substantially changed the page to reflect the views of the paper.  The synonymy was NOT accepted by the scientific community as reflected by scientific papers still using the genus name In: Zhang, Z.-Q. & Shear, W.A. (Eds) (2007) Linnaeus Tercentenary: Progress in Invertebrate Taxonomy. Zootaxa,
1668, 1–766. as of January 2009.  Thus the move was in responce to pov editing and not scientific consensus --Kevmin (talk) 06:26, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Since no one seems to object to this moved, I've performed the move to Nothomyrmecia macrops.  Editors of this page are requested to bring the text of the article into line with the new name. Thanks,--Aervanath (talk) 13:49, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Move to Nothomyrmecia

message: The ICZN Code deals with nomenclature, not taxonomic opinion. All the Code tells us is which name to use IF people decide that two (or more) existing names are synonyms of one another. If Ward & Brady had indicated that they thought Nothomyrmecia and Archimyrmex were synonyms, then Archimyrmex would have priority. They made no such indication; this was later authors' interpretations, and if these later authors wish to claim that the two groups are synonyms, then they would be justified in using Archimyrmex. That is their opinion. Similarly, if Baroni Urbani believes that Prionomyrmex and Nothomyrmecia are synonyms, then he would be justified in using Prionomyrmex. That is his opinion. It is mistaken, however, to claim that any such synonymies are "officially accepted" or "officially rejected". I know this all too well, as I am myself an ICZN Commissioner. Synonyms are only accepted or rejected in terms of whether the entomological community adopts them.
As such, there do not appear to be any ant taxonomists other than Baroni Urbani using the name Prionomyrmex macrops, and the team of people who are arguably the leading world authorities on ant taxonomy (Ward, Brady, Fisher, and others in the Ant Tree of Life program)  still recognize Nothomyrmecia as a valid taxon, and not a synonym of anything. That is their opinion, but it also represents the status quo in the present case.
Wikipedia's rule is to follow, not set, the examples of the scientific community. As such, there is insufficient evidence to justify the adoption of Baroni Urbani's novel classification over the standard classification. That may conceivably change, but as of this date the case is not yet decided - meaning the status quo stands, for now. However, while it should certainly be stated clearly on the pages for Prionomyrmex and Nothomyrmecia that Baroni Urbani has proposed their synonymy, it should NOT state that this proposal has been "officially rejected" - the appropriate phrase would be "this proposed synonymy has not yet been widely accepted." Dyanega (talk) 22:48, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Starting with the last question, wikipedia considers every living species of organism as worthy of having a page not just the flashy well known taxa.  As part of the overarching coverage given every taxon, common vernacular names are given at the head of the article.  Dinosaur and living fossil are both terms that have been applied to the species by the common public and thus are notable to include in the page.--Kevmin (talk) 15:05, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Clearly you did not understand what I stated in my post.  The terms "Dinosaur ant" and "living fossil" have nothing to do with actual fossils.  The terms have been applied to he living species by the general public in reference to the primitive nature of the species, not as reference to the Prionomyremex species.  One of the things that wikipedia does is report vernacular terms applies to taxa.--Kevmin (talk) 05:28, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

text: I apologize, I'm not sure how i missed that in the text. It was a leftover from one of hte moves to Prionomyrmex.  I have clarified that he "living fossil" term is due to the primitive nature of the living species biology and actions and removed the reference to fossil species.--Kevmin (talk) 03:15, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Synonymy/non-synonymy is never "official" 

message: I agree with the suggestion to merge the page Nothomyrmica here, as it appears to be a misspelling of Nothomyrmecia.  I wouls also suggest that this page should be moved to the genus name place over the redirect per WP: ToL practice for monotypic genera.--Kevmin § 15:35, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: All done. --Stemonitis (talk) 06:23, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks!--Kevmin § 15:31, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge and move 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Nothomyrmecia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20151120211407/http://antbase.org/ants/publications/21007/21007.pdf to http://antbase.org/ants/publications/21007/21007.pdf
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20150715213405/http://antbase.org/ants/publications/21067/21067.pdf to http://antbase.org/ants/publications/21067/21067.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:56, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified