Unknown: I disagree. Consider this definition: "An ontologically fundamental unique entity that has, in some sense something resembling desire/will, further, this entity deliberately, as an act of will, created the reality we experience."
Further, barring the case of, say, a deists, additional things could be noted: "An entity that in some sense directly orchestrates all of reality, even though it may seem otherwise."
I'm pretty sure most theists (at least monotheists) would agree that this is the thing they believe in, no?
So no, I don't think the disagreement between atheists and theists can be properly represented as a definitional dispute.
At tonight's Thanksgiving, Erin remarked on how this was her first real Thanksgiving dinner away from her family, and that it was an odd feeling to just sit down and eat without any prayer beforehand. (Yes, she's a solid atheist in no danger whatsoever, thank you for asking.)
And as she said this, it reminded me of how wrong it is to give gratitude to God for blessings that actually come from our fellow human beings putting in a great deal of work.
So I at once put my hands together and said,
"Dear Global Economy, we thank thee for thy economies of scale, thy professional specialization, and thy international networks of trade under Ricardo's Law of Comparative Advantage, without which we would all starve to death while trying to assemble the ingredients for such a dinner as this. Amen."