There are four global checklists because different groups of people become dissatisfied over existing checklists, and create new ones, each having a somewhat different goal. Birdlife is more concerned about conservation implications of taxonomy, IOC was initially formed to create s a single set of universal common names, Clements shifted over time to be the official checklist of Ebird, and Howard and Moore are more focused on the science side of things. Because many species have multiple names, or because different lists have had to create NEW names for new splits, different lists have adopted different names. The WGAC is trying to create a new list that will reconcile at least three of these lists, although Howard and Moore will continue to do there thing so to speak
There is far far less concern over these things among other groups of organisms, because the checklist stuff is left to science for the most part to concern itself with. It doesn't have a huge body of amateur naturalists arguing with each other over what common names should be used, nor a giant market of field guides to incorporate all of these things. That birders exist is what in part fuels the obsession with common names and almost certainly the demand for new global taxonomies. If the American Society of Mammalogy or the SSAR (which manages Herp lists for the USA/Canada) were to announce this sort of change, I doubt it would make the news in the same manner
Obsession over a unified single set of common names is honestly what landed us in this predicament. If there hadn't been the move to standardize this information to the extent bird folks have, getting rid of patronyms would never have been a big deal. The AOS could simply adopt a new set of names and folks could choose what ones they want to use.
