Once again it comes down to the subjective term "country". I never disagreed that we don't refer to them as a "country". As I do too. So no danger here of getting a glass in my face. I have spent quite a bit of time in Scotland successfully negotiating the politics and status without coming across that hazard. You'd be surprised how many Scots consider themselves in kind of a dual identity, Scottish and British, without shame - it's not all one way traffic on that issue. But like Gia said, what is a "country" or nation? It can be a very subjective term. What I was pointing out is that in practical sense of governance, Australian States have more delegated powers than the various components of the UK do. So sorry, not wrong at all in the points I make.
Another interesting piece to this. England actually has even less (virtually zero) devolved powers from the UK that are afforded to Scotland and Wales.
I'm not entirely disagreeing with you, in that self-identity is an interesting element in all of this. And extending on that as a bit of a tangent. I've observed something really interesting in Australia. NSW in particular (and to an extent VIC). I've observed that people self identify quite differently to the rest of the country in the smaller states. Perhaps because they are the two dominant states of the federation. In the two bigger states there is really no huge meaning to them of being a Victorian or New South Welshman. It's just kind of just there in the background. But to us in the smaller states it really is a far more prominent part of our indescribable sense of identity (perhaps why you and I see the topic through slightly different optics). Perhaps it goes someway to explaining why QLD has always seemed so much more passionate about State of Origin Rugby League. Or why WA (and to some degree my state of TAS) have a reputation of intense parochialism as part of their psyche. All interesting discussion. But this forum isn't big enough to express all thoughts on the issue.