"Village", however, could mean any of the following:
- The card whose name is just Village
- Any card with the word "village" in its title (sometimes including Ruined Village)
- Any card that always does everything that vanilla Village does
- Any card that always has an effect roughly comparable to Village (e.g. Lost City might not qualify because it's too powerful and Squire might not qualify because it's too weak)
- Any card that always or through a choice effect explicitly gives +2 actions
- Any card that is capable of giving +2 actions
- Any splitter
- Any combination of these (for example, to include Ruined Village as well as cards such as Squire)
I'm reasonably certain you're being willfully obtuse. There's really only two colloquial uses for "Village" - the card Village, and anything that gives +2 Actions. Wandering Minstrel is a village, Ruined Village is not.
Broadly, "village" can refer to anything that gives +2 actions or more, both explicitly (e.g. Village) and implicitly (e.g. Throne Room). So I mostly agree with you.
Still, there is a dilemma when it comes to whether or not Throne Room, Herald, Golem, etc. are considered a "village". Do consider them villages and you potentially get newer players to be unaware that the the scope of what is a "village" is so wide. Don't consider them as villages and you imply that broad statements about villages weren't also meant to encompass Throne Room, Herald, etc.
Splitter is a nice generic term for something that can be applied to anything that increases the limit of terminal actions (cards which use up an action), but it is not initially obvious what the term splitter is supposed to signify.
Hence the village/splitter terminology debate.
It doesn't help that we throw the term "necropolis" on stuff like Nobles and Squire that do not give +2 actions and card draw on the same play. Whether or not Necropolis is also a Village depends on context in the end.