Well there's no objective standard by which an archetype is defined, but I think I gave a pretty good reasoning why no-combo-control is more of a control deck than combo-control. You disagreed, but you didn't address my reasoning, which I think is valid:

my control deck without a combo is objectively more of a control deck than yours, because I have to play control- and more of it than you have to.

So unless you can poke some holes in that, I'm not convinced.

I guess in that case is Lantern Control the most pure version of control? Just win by eventually decking your opponent?

The assertion of "most pure version of control" is a little absolute so I don't know if I would go that far with the label, especially since it is kind of an archetypal anomaly in the same way that Burn is. But I do take your meaning and I guess if I had to quantify it, then yes, I would call lantern a "pure" control deck.