(195) Proposal to amend the Preamble by adding a “potentially sensitive content disclaimer and limitation of liability”

Authors of several discussion articles (Gillman & Wright in Commun. Biol. 3: art. 609. 2020; Smith Figueiredo Taxon 71: 1–5. 2022; Gillman 6–10. al. 933–935. Thiele 1151–1154. 2022) and formal proposals to amend the Code (Smith 70: 1395–1396. 2021; Hammer 1392–1394. 2021) recently proposed allow endorse rejection and/or replacement scientific names taxa that are considered be “culturally offensive inappropriate”, or even some other names, those supposedly not inappropriate but, e.g., reflecting “colonial imperialist past”. In my opinion, such mainly based on political, social, ethical ethnocultural criteria, which currently as nomenclaturally decisive International Nomenclature for algae, fungi, plants (“Code”: Turland Regnum Veg. 159. 2018) Codes biological nomenclature. These ideas were extensively discussed (Knapp 69: 1409–1410. Bionomina 25: 93–97. al., l.c.; l.c.) criticised journals (see Heenan New Zealand J. Bot. 59: 291–322. Palma Heath 22: 32–38. McGlone 60: 215–226. Mosyakin 1379–1380. 249–255. 1141–1150. Taxon, https://doi.org/10.1002/tax.12837. 2022). It is also worth considering its official communication similar issues Commission Zoological (Ceríaco Zool. Linn. Soc. 197: 283–286. 2023) concluded “renaming grounds threatens nomenclatural stability communication”. I understand respectfully acknowledge vulnerable emotionally sensitive people groups consider organisms governed by “offensive inappropriate”. cases, a content disclaimer limitation liability statement desirable. particular, think an addition could useful safeguarding authors editors present Code, well all who good faith lawful purposes create, modify use covered this against possible accusations allegations. Similar disclaimers available many publications online resources, e.g. Wikipedia (General disclaimer: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:General_disclaimer; Content https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Content_disclaimer) Biodiversity Heritage Library (Acknowledgment Harmful Content: https://about.biodiversitylibrary.org/about/harmful-content/). Further explanations recommendations provided Federation Associations Institutions their document 2021 “Objectionable Third-Party Responses” (https://repository.ifla.org/handle/123456789/1754). (All resources accessed 11 February 2023.) “Potentially Scientific created modified over centuries various national, ethnic, cultural, religious, historical, backgrounds, identities, origins, traditions. Such reflect rich but complicated sometimes controversial history explorations Anyone using should aware intended judging, evaluating, changing, rejecting, censoring because ethical, ideological, principles, procedures, except explicitly prescribed Preamble 1, 12, Art. 51.1). The anyone accordance with shall held responsible any discomfort, inconvenience, offense, mental emotional distress, negative consequences potentially caused person group may objectionable, offensive, inappropriate. viewed manifestation, support, endorsement racial, views, concepts, prejudices, ideologies deemed people.” am grateful Nicholas (Botanischer Garten und Botanisches Museum Berlin, Freie Universität Germany) John H. Wiersema (Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C., U.S.A.) comments editing.