Except not all definitions do.
Y'know, for someone who says 'purists' are uppity and rude, you're acting that way now. You're pleading that a perfectl valid definition is somehow invalid, simply because it is a foreign- and source- definition, and you're also claiming that there is only one english way, when the very fact that we're having this argument, when Wiki- a source mostly defined by the popular interpretation lists both, is ample evidence that there is more than one english definition in common usage.And don't try and spout other definitions off. It is fairly obvious that if you are speaking english that you are using the word in the english way unless you specifically specify otherwise. For english use they were close enough to being right.
It's not the lack of quoting, it's the lack of context. You neglected to mention I was responding to a very specific comment, which was actually incorrect.Edit-- and as a note I did read the post you were replying to... I just don't feel like quoting whole conversations over and over again.
At shiny: And they commonly don't.