Oppose I think the description should be Leucanthemum x superbum 'Alaska' (Shasta daisy).[1] A suitable scope is Leucanthemum x superbum, in my opinion. I don't think all 21 varieties merit individual scopes since many are visually similar.[2] When nominating an image of a cultivar, please provide citations supporting the significance or notability of that cultivar. Not all cultivars merit separate scopes, varieties of cultivars are even less likely to deserve individual scopes. --Walter Siegmund(talk)17:25, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Question Since most of the flowers in the genus look alike, shouldn't the proper scope be at the genus level, rather than the species or variety? this photo, a different species, looks all but identical. -- Ram-Man02:29, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment In the Asteraceae, the flowers do not necessarily distinguish one species from another. In those species, the leaf shape, leaf arrangement, involucral bracts, pappus, and/or presence or absence of hairs may be more useful. In such instances, the nomination "reason" parameter may be used to list distinguishing features that are well-depicted in the image; an image of only the flower, as in your example, would not be a valued image for such a species. A valued image of Leucanthemum vulgare would depict its "involucre bracts narrow with a dark brown margin, the outer lance-triangular, the inner oblong" or other distinguishing features.[3] --Walter Siegmund(talk)04:33, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
