This is correct. Some legacy paraphyletic groups exist, largely where there’s still lack of consensus in the wider field on resolving them, and also higher up in the taxonomy where it would be very burdensome on system resources to reclassify millions of observations to follow more recent monophyletic taxonomies. You can find discussion of them here:
- List of paraphyletic groups in iNat’s Taxonomy
- Why is inat so inconsistent with paraphyletic groupings that are still useful to have
Suborder Heterocera is the historical paraphyletic group for moths. In Google Scholar I see Heterocera still being used in papers going up to 2026, but they’re mostly researchers in India and barely any uses from from Europe or North America. Based on the Google Books trends usage of “Heterocera” fell pretty rapidly after 2000. So when iNat started in 2008 it was already out of fashion by at least a decade. It looks like a suborder Heterocera did exist as a taxon on iNaturalist at one point, but it wasn’t properly connected to the taxonomy and curators decided to deactivate it rather than connect it.