Oof what a silly naming decision. Deepfake already has an established coherent meaning - it's specifically about impersonation with video/audio/images. Just writing in collaboration with a tool is not deep or fake necessarily.
I'm cool with using the word Deepfake for text. Generated text should generally be referred to in the derogatory, considering it very rarely adds anything of value.
So you're cool with using just any words to describe just anything, so long as the vibe is right. Great. I'm sure that'll help a lot with everybody's understanding of the world.
Deepfake is a pejorative not because of the artistic value of the AI but because of the ethnical concerns that spring to mind around one's ownership of their own likeness, and how the tech can be used for deepfake porn and political misinformation. Muddying that conversation with a personal dislike for any AI seems harmful especially to the people most affected by it.
The closest analogue for text I can think of is when you use an LLM to write in the style of someone else, like Shakespeare. But "deepfake" is a stretch because AI-generated text in someone's style is not particularly convincing that it actually came from them, and wasn't too hard to do manually before. Plus doesn't raise the same ethical questions.
Ah, yes. Text generation trained on nearly the entire corpus of preserved human literature, what a useless invention. Yes, let's call it derogatory terms, and maybe it will leave us alone.