metabolism - Does Glycolysis produce lactate, or pyruvate?

EDIT- Somebody suggested that this is the same question as this, it isn't. This one is asking about the definition of glycolysis. That one was asking about the definition of fermentation.

Does Glycolysis produce lactate, or pyruvate?

I'm aware that ultimately in the human body, after sugar is converted into pyruvate, then if fermentation happens it will be converted into lactate, or if aerobic respiration happens then it won't.

My question is on the term Glycolysis

I notice that most sources seem to say glycolysis ends with pyruvate

e.g.

Glycolysis.. is the metabolic pathway that converts glucose.. into pyruvate

The only time lactate comes into it is After glycolysis. (so in this wikipedia page on Glycolysis, in the Post Glycolysis part it mentions this) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glycolysis#Post-glycolysis_processes "pyruvate is converted to lactate "

However, on the other hand, I see some sources, even another wikipedia article titled "anaerobic glycolysis", which the page says isn't well sourced, it has glycolysis as ending in lactate.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anaerobic_glycolysis "Anaerobic glycolysis is the transformation of glucose to lactate when limited amounts of oxygen (O2) are available"

Also here https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4343186/ "we contend that La− is always the end product of glycolysis"
(putting aside their controversial claim that it is always the end product, i'm interested here in the idea of theirs that it is ever an end product, so, their use of the term glycolysis)

So it seems that there are those two positions

For the purposes of this question i'll call one position the lactate position and the other position the pyruvate position.

One position, call it the lactate position, which is those sources that place lactate, as the end product of glycolysis.. thus counting not just sugar->pyruvate, but sugar->pyruvate + the whole fermentation process, as glycolysis.

While others, call this the Pyruvate position, count purely sugar->pyruvate those sources count just that, as Glycolysis.

I'm wondering if both definitions are correct.. / both usages are valid.. Or if one of those e.g. if the lactate one, is an odd one out and if most academic texts wouldn't use that definition, and would use the pyruvate position for their definition of Glycolysis.

Note- I had written that glycolysis ends with pyruvate {or pyruvic acid which dissociates into pyruvate}, and the lactic acid fermentation ends in lactate {or lactic acid which dissociates into lactate}. But what is in those curly braces there is wrong and I have been corrected on that one. Glycolysis produces pyruvate, and Lactic Acid Fermentation produces lactate. The reason (answerer David explains), why Lactic acid fermentation bears that name, is it is named after what are called "lactic acid bacteria" "Lactic acid bacteria are named for their effect on the medium in which such bacteria grow, not for the ionization state of lactic acid in the cell and when bound to enzymes (about which the namers could have had no knowledge)." and they do that type of fermentation that produces lactate. There are two types of "lactic acid fermentation", https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lactic_acid_fermentation homolactic fermentation, and heretolactic fermentation. Humans do homolactic fermentation that produces lactate and no ethanol, as opposed to heterolactic fermentation that produces lactate and ethanol https://www.onlinebiologynotes.com/different-fermentation-pathway-bacteria/

Also, note that Muscle cells do what is called "lactic acid fermentation", but the idea that they produce lactic acid is a myth that has been commonly propagated in sports science(I guess perhaps partly as a result of what I think is biology's poor nomenclature, the fact that the process is called lactic acid fermentation). Muscles don't produce lactic acid, in fact, it's not lactic acid and they don't produce it. Muscle cells use lactate, they don't produce lactic acid. This is verifiable from googling humans produce lactate not lactic acid eg the first line here mentions that myth and calls it out as a myth. The body of the following question and its answers here are related and very interesting.

Answer

I think you will find all text books (e.g. Berg et al. Ch 16) describe glycolysis as the conversion of glucose to pyruvate, as this is how it has been defined and considered in countless biochemical papers. The subsequent reactions of pyruvate are regarded as separate metabolic steps or pathways.

The title of the short review article you cite (“Lactate is always the end product of glycolysis”) has mislead you — it was obviously meant to be controversial. It is the ambiguous term “end product” that is the (deliberate?) cause of the problem. What the article suggest is that the product of glycolysis — pyruvate — is always, at least partially, converted to lactate in animal cells. It would have been better entitled “Lactate is always produced from the pyruvate generated in glycolysis”. Whether or not that is true (and that is not your question as I understand it), the conversion of pyruvate to lactate is not considered to be part of glycolysis any more than its conversion to acetate.

There may be ambiguity in the use of the ancient term ‘fermentation’, but not with glycolysis and other metabolic pathways established in the twentieth century.