I think that this is the nub of the issue. The interpretation, or understanding, of what the term 'artist' means to any one person is not necessarily in accordance with the dictionary definition, and has 'cultural' connotations. For my part, I would agree, generally, with the feeling of pretention when using the term, and have no great esteem for those that apply it too widely. Anyone can be taken to be an 'artist', whatever their 'skill' level, in whatever discipline, and there are many that do, indeed, claim the title, despite turning out what I would call 'rubbish', or worse. I have more esteem for 'craftsman' (OK, craftsperson, if you must..!), as that, to me, implies some mastery of the discipline in question. I'm rather wary of 'art' in general; this is simply my own notion, and I am quite happy to allow others to have a wider appreciation. There is no definitive, objective, way of determining what constitute an 'artist' except that offered by the dictionary, so, in that wide sense, most folk are 'artists' in one field or another. Does that give them (and I include myself...) any 'special' status..? I think not.