Regards to your definition here. That is only one use of the word tropical...
You're right - but you miss the point - two in fact. First,the alternate definitions of "tropical" all derive from the root one, which is essentially latitudinally based, and are comparative not definitive. That is, we describe things as "tropical" because they resemble what we stereotypically perceive as being the nature of the tropics [even though that stereotype is incomplete and to some extent inaccurate], but we do so in a comparative manner [ie, "tropical heat", "it
seemed tropical"; but not "tropical forests of Oregon"]. Because of that, we have the second point, which is that you CANNOT state that *** is not "tropical" when it DOES in fact meet at least one definition of the word. For that matter, the primary definition. Any place in the tropics is "tropical", regardless of whether it adheres to our stereotyped views of the tropics. Any place outside of the tropics is NOT tropical, although it may comparatively seem so.
Arguably, in the latter case, one could adhere to a climatic rather than purely latitudinal definition, in which case some places outside of the tropics would by climatically identical and continuous with places within the tropics. Regardless though, a glacier or desert within the tropics...is tropical.