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