This is technically wrong - those are not families, as this example for red fox
Vulpes vulpes shows:
Technically families would be things like “canids”, “felids”, “vipers” or “pigeons” but we obviously are not aiming at this level of accuracy and sometimes the common tag on FurB is not for the family but for a subfamily (like canines instead of canids) or suborder (snakes) or order (owls) and it’s fine as it is not important for those common names to be always on the same level of biological classifications, but nevertheless none of those mentioned in the first post are orders/suborders/families/subfamilies, they are either classes (mammal, reptile, bird, amphibian) or phyllum (arthropod) or something called a paraphyletic group (fish - animals from the classes “jawless fish”, “cartilaginous fish” and “bony fish” are considered “fish”).
I think it’s important not to use the name “family” as we do have tags for different families, e.g.:
This should be probably just named “group” or “class” (because most of those are in fact a biological classes).