Ah, I think I get your point. You mean if I take pictures then I am a photographer. Is that what you mean?
Bingo! Although actually I think I would say if you have a hobby of or otherwise pursue photography you're a photographer. There are lots of people that "take pictures" that I personally would not consider photographers. Just like cycling--there are lot of people that ride bicycles that are not cyclists, but also many, many cyclists that are not professional.
I think it's just different social interpretation of "photographer" in each country / region. In my country, it's more like a job. It's exactly like what Oxford Dictionary describes (http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/photographer?q=photographer).
There definitely appears to be regional discrepancies. But notice the definition in your link says "especially as a job", not "specifically as a job"--big difference.
Let me tell you my experience to understand my perspective. My wife IS a photographer. I'm a cyclist. Last year my cycling team sponsored a race and asked if anyone could help take pictures. Having access to my wife's L glass, I said, sure I can give 'er a go. Showed up, pushed buttons and turned dials and had a grand ol' time. We put them on our team's website, and all the sudden we were getting emails of "Can I buy that picture?" Being generally opposed to turning down money, next thing I knew I had an extra $1000 in my account.
So am I a photographer? I certainly haven't quit my day job, and there's a whole lot about photography I don't know. (Lighting? Isn't that what the sun is for??
) But I enjoy it, and if people are offering me money to take pictures I'm not likely to turn them down. So I'd say it's kinda ambiguous at best.
BTW, I do use my DSLR to shoot landscape and street-snapshot. But at the same time I collect cameras too so I am a collector too.
Haha! I hadn't even thought of collector. Landscape? That's turning the piece of paper sideways, right?