As discussed here, it sounds like POWO got a little ahead of itself and accepted a split of T. ovatum into T. ovatum, T. crassifolium, and T. scouleri based on an informal conversation with the authors of a forthcoming study. The study authors then proposed a similar but different split, into T. stenosepalum (which POWO treats as a synonym of T. ovatum ovatum, currently). Strangely enough, this apparently resulted in the published study effectively saying inat was making up taxonomy by having T. scouleri, unaware that we only have the taxon because POWO does.

The situation is kind of messy, so we are going to lump T. scouleri back into T. ovatum and let the primary literature/POWO figure it out, then reassess the situation on inat when and if necessary. Little to no ID information will be lost in the lump because the split T. ovatum and T. stenosepalum are effectively allopatric, but because the name T. ovatum var. stenosepalum is valid we may as well just activate it in case anyone wants it for the purposes of studying the ramifications of the split.