Weak oppose, but with a conditional Support: I think this is a fine example, but we do not seem to have anything but mounted specimens. As such, I think it would be better to promote this under the scope of Xylophanes guianensis. If nothing else, "Mounted specimen" is not actually a useful subcategory; as I don't imagine anyone would explicitly look for mounted as opposed to ones taken from life. And, while I might think that Commons:Valued_image_scope#Animals is a little over-restrictive, it still explicitly forbids this sort of subscope. If the scope is switched, please automatically change this to a support. Adam Cuerden (talk) 07:48, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment No. In entomology to describe a butterfly it must be mounted form. But this is not the physiological position of rest, found in nature. Especially the lower wings in this family are covered. There in place for two images. On the one hand the form mounted and the other an image in vivo that we have not yet but will happen. This is a debate that we had in VI. Again your actions are inappropriate and vexatious. Take the time to learn before. If you have a question, it is easy to ask and get an answer courteous.It is possible that you are not a gentleman. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 08:06, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, but while I accept that this was likely discussed, the criteria weren't updated after this discussion. I honestly don't see how you can find stating an opinion in line with the criteria as written as being "inappropriate and vexatious". I was all set to change to support up to reading that point; as it stands, I'm just going to cross out my vote, and you can find someone else Adam Cuerden (talk) 23:38, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I sincerely thank you. I also admit that my remarks were very lively. I will always be with you to defend the VI rules, if you please choose the path of dialogue beforehand. We have the same goal: to live this label.--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:07, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I kind of figured this was a reasonable place for discussion. I mean, it's not like it can be closed immediately. Anyway, as I said I was going to support, and only didn't because of annoyance, let's put this behind us, and I'll just Support. Adam Cuerden (talk) 09:51, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
