Every definition of civil war with which I am familiar requires the goal of both sides to be the capture of the government of the entire nation, not an establishment of a separate government.
A war of Independence is not a "civil war" insofar as someone is trying to take over control of the entire nation. What we had in 1861 is more a case of a wife trying to leave an abusive husband, and he then forceably drags her back against her will.
Go look up a definition that doesn’t cite historical examples.
You’re just delving into trivia and diversion. There are some very mighty stretches of absurdity going on here with you and the other proponents who argue against a very simple definition of civil war.
My FIRST contention that the classical American Civil War was just that - a civil war between citizens of the same country. It wasn’t predicated on region or anything beyond both sides being citizens of the same country.
I can’t help it if you guys can’t accept that definition. Your bleats don’t make what you say so.