Question Shouldn't the scope be limited to this form of the flower? It is visusally distinct from this, for instance. I have no idea about the exact terms. --Eusebius (talk) 11:25, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I have a problem with the scope. Should a species photo show a complete shot of the species, or just part. eg if it were an animal, would a shot of the head and shoulders be sufficient? I would expect a species shot to show all the major aspects of the plant, eg difference between mature lower leaves and upper leaves, and maybe for this species the fruiting stage as well as buds and flowers (as they can all be found together). So I think I agree with Eusebius, perhaps 'flower' subscope or similar. --Tony Wills (talk) 20:53, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Respectfully disagree, this is very close to the best possible in showing the different parts of the plant. As far as I know a flower and a fruit can't be shown together in the same plant as they develop in different times. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 09:08, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support. After reading the discussion and reviewing other photos on the category and on Flickr. We can have a other nomination for only the fruit. --Dereckson (talk) 13:11, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
