Misidentified Iconotype

[Carlos AR Fernandes]

Hello to all,

Sorry for the previous posting (that's the problem when you use cut and
paste and you don't check before clicking "send"...). Oops.

Is someone aware of any case/example/reference of a species
described only with basis in a old drawing (iconotype) that, due to
the low quality of the illustration, caused such controversy among
specialists (e.g. different experts do not agree with the ID of
the image as in the case of very closely related species, or if it is
impossible to decide with objectivity where the image is accurate or
affected by artistic freedom/style/baroque) a new name and/or type
needed to be decided for the species.
I am sure there must be several cases of this but I was unable so
far to find references for it and at the moment I am involved in a
taxonomic/nomenclatural argument of this kind.
Maybe someone with experience as museum curator as faced this situation
before. Or perhaps any expert in nomenclatural questions well acquainted
with the ICNZ.
I am looking forward to a reply and very grateful in advance.

Carlos