In my pedantic technical opinion (technical as in literal, not technical-interview), these are all subsets of encryption. Encryption to me is anything that scrambles the data to non-literal-plain-text in a way where you need a key to read it. These are just encryption, but the password is always just the word "password", or for a specific example, the source text.
In my continued opinion, can't hashes be "found out" in theory if you had unlimited computing time + unlimited attempts at brute force hashing every string?
Encoding is just encrypting the text into a non-literal-plain-text format by using (an extremely weak, known password) to translate into another (computer-readable) language. I don't really have anything to add from the source to this one.
Why is my distinction about the definition of encryption important to me?
In my opinion, we shouldn't limit our mind to ONLY knowing encryption as a method containing some math formula someone came up with to scramble you data based on an input password. There are a magnitude of ways to encrypt your actions in a more broad sense.
For example, what if you identify yourself by handing in a series of paintings to somebody (an authenticator) who physically determines your entry? He can determine if you pass by having knowledge that the order of the paintings and the artist's initials correspond to their position in the alphabet to decrypt your ID number. (Some other tricks could be used to prevent random turn in or duplicates, such as only using a specific style of art, but I'm skipping that for this example.) Is that not an encryption method that accepts a user input and encrypts it with a black box formula to output some code?