In order to be validly published, a name of a new fossil-taxon published on or after 1 January 1996 must be accompanied by a Latin or English description or diagnosis or by a reference (see Art. 38.13) to a previously and effectively published Latin or English description or diagnosis.
As Art. 39.1 does not apply to names of fossil-taxa, a validating description or diagnosis (see Art. 38) in any language is acceptable for them prior to 1996.
A name of a new fossil-genus or lower ranked fossil-taxon published on or after 1 January 1912 is not validly published unless it is accompanied by an illustration or figure showing the essential characters or by a reference to a previously and effectively published such illustration or figure. For this purpose, in the case of a name of a fossil-genus or subdivision of a fossil-genus, citation of, or reference (direct or indirect) to, a name of a fossil-species validly published on or after 1 January 1912 will suffice.
“Laconiella” when published by Krasser (in Akad. Wiss. Wien Sitzungsber., Math.-Naturwiss. Kl. Abt. 1, 129: 16. 1920) included only one species, the intended name of which, “Laconiella sardinica”, was not validly published as no illustration or figure or reference to a previously and effectively published illustration or figure was provided. “Laconiella” is not, therefore, a validly published generic name.
Batodendron Chachlov (in Izv. Sibirsk. Otd. Geol. Komiteta 2(5): 9, fig. 23–25. 1921) was published with a description and illustrations. Even though the new fossil-genus did not include any named species, its name (an illegitimate later homonym of Batodendron Nutt. 1843) is validly published.
A name of a new fossil-species or infraspecific fossil-taxon published on or after 1 January 2001 is not validly published unless at least one of the validating illustrations is identified as representing the type specimen (see also Art. 9.15).
