as is the case with common names, i doubt anyone can give you a definite answer to your question. people usually use acromantis formosana, however i have no idea whether this is accurate or not. either way, one species can go by many different names, all depending on whoever it is that can't be bothered to use the actual scientific name. there really is no excuse for it.
i know people say as beginners it is easier to learn the common names but is it really? at least learning the first part of the name is better than learning the common name, in my opinion. for example theoprous elegans. ive seen this called "banded flower mantis" and "boxer flower mantis" among other things, when it would be so much easier to say "theopropus", or "t.elegans", then it is highly likely that someone will know you are talking about theopropus elegans (probably).
i know i'm going on a bit, and of course in an ideal world, we would all use full scientific names. but my main point is, even if you find the scientific names difficult to learn, even half of the name is better than using one of the myriad common names.
i.diabolica, idolomantis, idolos, blephs, blepharopsis, blopsis, mendica, b.mendica : while not the full/completely accurate scientific names, in my opinion these are all preferable to whatever common name you can think of, and probably just as easy (if not easier) to learn than the common names.
devils flower mantis.... is that idolomantis diabolica or blepharopsis mendica? no wait, thats the thistle mantis right?
anyway, this has been discussed at length already, probably numerous times. it's all so silly.
