You have to understand, too, that taxonomy will always be in flux. If a taxonomist analyses a genus, and concludes that it is all correct just as it stands, then he will have nothing to publish. So of course he will make changes. That is why it is called "doing a revision" -- we can take for granted that changes will be made, since every taxonomist has a somewhat different species concept than everyone else. I doubt if anyone is purely a "lumper" or a "splitter;" rather, everyone has different ideas as to the relative importance of any given variable trait.
One of the strangest revisions I saw recently: I was looking at a list of flora of the Dominican Republic, and I saw that both Antirrhinum (snapdragons) and Linaria (toadflax) were listed under Plantaginaceae, not the Scrophulariaceae where I have been
accustomed to seeing them.
Dear David: There is a mistake in the World Checklist. Anthurium elegans Engl. Is a synonym of A. pedatum (L) Schott. In my copy of the checklist I have also included A. fortunatum Bunting as being equal to A. pedatum.
I have received an inflorescence of Anthurium elegans from Josef Bogner some time ago. Now I checked it's taxonomic status on the Kew Monocot checklist. There, Anthurium elegans is listed as synonym for 2 species, Anthurium palmatum and A. fortunatum. Josef Bogner says that his specimen is different from A. palmatum. So it could be Anthurium fortunatum - or is Anthurium elegans itself still a valid species? Thanks for help!