Ec
I am sorry that this debate is getting so heated. There has been a compromise
reached, and I can't see the necessity to upset it.
The capitalisation style is not restricted to field guides. It is standard in
indubitably serious profession publications and organisations such as the
British Ornithological Union, British Birds Rarities Committee, Birds of the
Western Palearctic, Handbook of Birds of The World, Handbook of Australian and New
Zealand Birds, Ibis etc.
Also Charles Sibley's DNA-DNA scientific papers use capitalisation, and you
can't get much more serious than that (incidently, he also wrote and
illustrated the best current guide to the birds of North America).
The main exceptions to capitalisation are paper encyclopedias and their
on-line versions. The serious point I was making earlier was that the nature of
wikien means that there have to be compromises, as there are on spelling and
vocabulary issues, and the nature of some of the articles. If we want this project
to be like Brittanica, why bother competing?
As you are aware, my main interest is birds, but mammals, as far as I can
see, follow the same conventions. I don't know enough about other taxonomic
groups to go to the wall on them. I can't see why the people who write the articles
can't get on with using the agreed consistent style without it upsetting
those who don't, on the whole, write the articles
Jim