It doesn't matter what they state, because they chop and change their own rules as they see fit.... didn't you know?
So, here is an example directly from NACC/SACC that refutes what you have just written.
Link-
A. Split extralimital Aramides albiventris from Aramides cajaneus B. Change English name of Aramides cajaneus from Gray-necked Wood-Rail to Gray-cowled Wood-Rail
One. small-ranging, subspecies group (
albiventris, along with a few other small ranging taxa) of the mega widespread Neotropical species Grey-necked Wood-Rail
Aramides cajanea gets split. Which species gets to keep the name Grey-necked WR... the very wide-ranging and nominate one that ranges from Costa Rica to Argentina OR the small-ranging split, that occurs in parts of Central America that gets into the NACC domain? Well, neither through an absurd series of uninteligible fast-tracked events. The well established Grey-necked Wood-Rail gets changed to Grey-cowled Wood-Rail and
albiventris becomes Russet-naped Wood-Rail, yet much (or even most) posterior literature continues to use Grey-necked Wood-Rail for either species. This is a prime example of how NACC and SACC destabilized the nomenclature.
This really sucks but it happened and not the first time. So, if you now look at internet entries for these
Aramides you will easily get very confused as to what is going on, or what happened. You need to know the full history just to understand how they messed it up.
Now, ..... with
S. coerulescens, the nominate group also has the overwhelmingly largest range of the three taxonomic groups and by a massive margin, so what is there to not like about the name Grayish Saltator. Why does it need to changed and which box hasn't been ticked ? It also contradicts that SACC statement of yours Niels. They do it all the time.
The saltator is just another example... there are so many more.
