indie may have been used to describe certain types of music, but wrongly. indie was short for independent, and didn't describe a type of music at all. all sorts of music were indie
why would it feel wrong to dismiss an album from being considered an indie album if it wasn't an indie album because it was on a major label? what difference does it make?
you may as well ask what's the best rock album and let people pick albums by herbie hancock and kylie. it just defeats the whole purpose of asking such a question. albums like ok computer and a different class were on major labels so benefitted from a specific type of distribution and promotion that most true indie records didn't have. a good chunk of records mentioned are really britpop records on major labels, not indie
You seem to be dismissing a hell of a lot of influential albums just because they were lucky enough to be spotted by a major label. Just because the definition started one way, it doesn't mean things don't evolve. Pop was originally short for popular music, however there is now a sub genre of indie called indie pop, yet it is not particularly popular.
Here is a question for you.
The first album by the Presidents of the USA was released by PopLama records, an indie record label yet they are a rock band.
To further complicate matters the album was then re-released by Columbia records.
How would you describe this album?
Things arn't as black and white as you like to think