The International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN; hereafter, the Code) governs not only the availability and application of scientific zoological names once they enter the realm of nomenclature but also what is to be considered published work for the purpose of zoological nomenclature. Article 8.1.1 of the Code clearly demands that to be considered published in the meaning of the Code, works “…must be issued for the purpose of providing a permanent public and scientific record.” This requirement is often unfulfilled with the publication of nomenclatural acts in hobbyist magazines and amateur literature. Nevertheless, some names published in such outlets are in use today although, under strict application of the Code, these names could be de facto nonexistent for the purpose of nomenclature and cannot be made available simply by subsequent usage (ICZN, 1999: Articles 11.5.2, 16.1). In this paper, I discuss the application of Article 8.1.1 to the nonscientific literature and, as a consequence, resolve a nomenclatural problem posed by two populations of snakes in the genus Leiopython Hubrecht, 1879 that have been recognized as valid species but that do not have valid names under the requirements of the Code.