The fact that Akira Toriyama's hell was so drastically different implies he did not create the other one.
Toei giving Dragon Ball an anime really doesn't mean jack, they can be a great gateway to Dragon Ball but no matter their contribution it wasn't their story so I don't know why you're pulling that out.
You have not "disproven" that definition, you have merely said you do not like it. It is a definition that was first used in that manner to describe Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's works on Sherlock Holmes as the only authentic works.
There is not "correct" definition of the word canon, despite what you think. There are several and it does not matter what the current, up to date website says, these definitions do not magically become wrong.
Look up Sherlock Holmes and how Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's works are the only canon ones, as later authors added to it. This is the first time it was described in such a manner.
Granted in this definition it is said that all works after Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's are non-canon, so by this definition literally anything other than Akira Toriyama's work is irrelevant.
You can use the word egregious to mean Horrible or Amazing, the fact that the "current" definition is one is meaningless, it just means that's the one many people use.
I also never said anything about Dragon Ball Online.
Original Work by the Original Author (Or Successor) does not imply the Anime, which is given an outline by the original author but not written by him or successor, means it is a lesser version of canon.
This does not quite fit into the canon definition above, but it is relatively close and one could argue the chosen successor is given the same authenticity as the original one.
And even if I were to use another definition of canon, the "best of" one, it would still wreck have the franchise into non-canon territory.
Even if Dragon Ball Super manga was made after the Anime, this does not matter. It was canonized by being written by the successor.
If recognizing the original author or someone they explicitly state is their successor is the only actual source of a story such as this and by several definitions the only canon storyline, then sure, that makes me a "comic elitist" to use Blaziken's words, who decries everything related to that definition as "headcanon"
But in answer to your original question, ConTraZ, by a few definitions, the form is non-canon. You just have to ask which definition fits mostly with a fictional story.