“…Option 2 would include three species that are or have been referred to as Platypterygius , including the well‐known Platypterygius australis , for which numerous descriptions and specimens are available (e.g. Wade, ; Wade, ; Kear, ; Zammit, ; Zammit et al ., ; Maxwell, Zammit & Druckenmiller, ); however, we conclude that this option is not advisable, predominantly because it would restrict the name Platypterygius to a clade that probably excludes the current type species, Platypterygius platydactylus , creating even more confusion. Furthermore, the application of the name Platypterygius to this clade would, like option 1, result in an unusual longevity for this taxon (early Barremian–middle Cenomanian, i.e.…”