Reading Glenn's notes I didn't think this speciemen matched Stibaroma undescribed species very well (i.e ...'the undescribed species.the three black transverse lines on the forewing are generally stronger and the outer one has a more acute and deeper outward angle.') OK, this is apparently a male, so I take your point that this is probably not S. melanotoxa because the basal and medial lines do not touch. I note that Moths of Victoria recognise two other un-nameed species Stibaroma sp.(1) and Stbaroma sp.(2). Of those two options I now think this specimen better matches Stibaroma sp.(1) (i.e shape of basal and outer line with a sharp point) although the median line is not very prominent in this example (MoV do show such sp.(1) male, on page 2/3, which matches well). Therefore I'm suggesting the new category: 'Stibaroma undescribed species MOV sp.(1).'
How about we put this and the 'undescribed' into just Stibaroma (undetermined species) for now. I think it is not in our remit to get involved in new taxonomy. Got to leave some topics for future PhD students to work on.
I am not suggesting new taxonomy, just an interim working category similar to what we have done for the various Proteuxoa spp. whixh apparently match suggested Moths of Victoria groupings.
I think the common moth that CNM has been calling Stibaroma undescribed species and MoV Stibaroma sp1 are the same species. I've updated the notes on the species pages.