A fact from Sanctioned name appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 10 July 2010 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fungi, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Fungi 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.FungiWikipedia:WikiProject FungiTemplate:WikiProject FungiFungi articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Tree of Life, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of taxonomy and the phylogenetictree of life 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.Tree of LifeWikipedia:WikiProject Tree of LifeTemplate:WikiProject Tree of Lifetaxonomic articles
The concept of a Sanctioned name is a topic broader than the mycological examples of the current text, which should be expanded.--Wetman (talk) 21:11, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There is enough available information on this topic to further develop the article to at least GA status while limiting the subject to mycology; perhaps a move to Sanctioned name (mycology) would be appropriate? Sasata (talk) 22:06, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
What other specific examples do you have in mind? Usually the general concept would be simply something like official name (notwithstanding the somewhat dubious redirect), AFAICT. In taxonomy, sanctioned names only applies to fungi under the ICBN and certainly is not found in the ICZN. I am not aware of the concept appearing in other codes (registering of names under the ICNCP being a separate concept). Circéus (talk) 22:24, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know of any use of "sanctioned names" outside mycology either. The concept of a conserved name (under both the ICZN and the ICBN) is somewhat similar, but clearly distinct. Ucucha 16:43, 4 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
