This is analagous to the situation we recently tidied with Amata (genus) and Amata sp. The higher level taxonomy. ie Amata (genus) or Olethreuitinae (subfamily), should be used when we are confident the the record belongs to the genus or subfamily, but don't know which species. Taxon undescribed species should only be used when we recognise the record as a particular species that doesn't have a name. If there is more than one such species in the same taxon, it needs to be given an informal name, eg we use Philobota mathematica group undescribed species and Philobota undescribed species near arabella. I wish people would stop creating taxon sp, as it just confuses the situation. I have tided up a lot of them, but they keep coming back. I've changed the title of the CNM entry to Olethreutinae (subfamily)