Derevianko (2011) provides a monograph-length review of anatomically modern Homo sapiens and mentions five geographic subspecies of homo sapiens: "H. s. africanensis (Africa), H. sapiens orientalensis (East and Southern Asia), H. sapiens neanderthalensis (Europe) and H. sapeins altaiensis (Southern Siberia and Cnetral Asia)," but does not explicitly indicate the creation of a new subspecies in accordance with Article 16.1 of the ICZN, nor explicitly fix a type specimen as required by Article 16.4. The text also lacks a clear differential diagnosis in accord with Article 13.1 (nomen nudum).
Zubova et al. (2017) present a morphological analysis of isolated molars (Denisova 4 and Denisvoa 8) and attribute them to the taxon Homo altaiensis, citing Derevianko, 2011, but Derevianko (2011) explicitly rejects naming a new species on p. 465, "During the preparation of the earlier article, adressing mtDNA from the hominid phalanx found in stratum 11, members of Pääbo's team considered the possibility of regarding the Deinsovans as a distinct species (Homo altaiensis)(Krause et al., 2007), but it was decided to refrain from introducing a new species. The results of the nuclear genome sequencing suggest that the Denisovans were a subspecies, which, along with others, was ancestral with regard to modern humans." Derevianko (2011) refers consistently to H. s. altaiensis at the subspecies level throught the rest of the text.
Zubova et al. use the species names Homo altaiensis (Derevianko, 2011) and Denisovan (Reich et al., 2010) interchangeably. This similarity marked the first time a taxon was classified based on a genetic analysis rather than a morphological one. Zubova et al. (2011) examined dental variation. Zubovia et al. (2011) concluded that H. altaiensis is distinct genetically and morphologically from H. sapiens and H. neanderthalensis.