There is no game of Poker. It is a wide variety of games like 5-card draw, Omaha, Texas, studs, Chinese open face poker. Also a slot machine where you draw 5 cards or pretty much any game that uses classical poker hand rankings is called poker. There is also a planning poker.
I think the name is fine
— [WikiPedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poker)
I don’t think I would have gone for that definition, but now that I see it, it sums up everything I’ve ever known “Poker” to be. The game is won by comparing cards you have left (meaning that Rummy, Go Fish, or Bridge are different), and there’s a wager about the game (possibly just bragging rights if not playing for money).
I even checked the Wikipedia article about Poker and there is a quote very similar to my wording:
"Other games that use poker hand rankings may likewise be referred to as poker."
Naming things is hard but there's no hard limits for the expansive approach, you can call all card games or all 5-things-games Poker. Your mileage as to communication with other people may vary, though.
Where we're disagreeing is at how we're seeing what's conventional.
You said "you can't call it poker" with a tone of an authority.
And I say that you can.
The actual quote, word for word is "I also don't think this can be called Poker, really."
There is nothing suggesting a tone of authority, on the contrary this is someone explicitly sharing their own opinion on the matter.
This is a misquote, if I ever saw one.
What I've actually written (emphasis added): "I also don't think this can be called Poker, really."
In other words, this is my personal line of thought, with the argument given in the next sentence, and "really" means "to some extent it can, but not to the full".