Currently there are 22 questions tagged with sansevieria and as I have stumbled upon some dracaena (71 questions tagged) tagged questions I started to wonder if we want to address the reclassification of Sansevieria into Dracaena.
I did not know the biologists had been at work and the article you referred to was published in 2014. There are a number of common references to the renaming so I guess it's not unknown.
I think your proposal has merit as long as we add information in the dracaena tag that this now includes Sanseveria.
Of note: the same web page indicates that "Thaumatophyllum bipinnatifidum, formerly Philodendron bipinnatifidum".
Weighing in a bit late here, but does any one use Symphyotricum instead of Aster? Hylotelephium instead of Sedum? Lamprocapnos spectabilis instead of Dicentra spectabilis? No. Just because some taxonomist has to write a paper doesn't mean that we need to follow blindly along. We need, IMO, to follow the Horticulture trade in these instances, or we can quickly lose casual gardeners by referencing plants that they do not recognize.
As for common names yeah they're great if you're a native n English speaker, but not so great if you're not. If we create a Snake Plant (no hyphen, BTW) tag, then do we also create a Mother-in-law's Tongue tag, because some readers many know the plant only by that name? Common names are also commonly used to refer to more than one plant. Examples: Pincushion Flower could be a Scabiosa, a Knautia, or an Armeria, while Snakeplant refers to three different plants in three totally different Families.
I am a huge proponent of following the science, but we must tread a middle ground when it comes to scientific nomenclature. And in no case should we use common names in favor of commonly used botanical names,