I love walking around on a rainy day with high-speed film and a Nikon with an 85/1.4 tucked under my
parka, often shot wide open. I briefly become a "bokeh" maniac on such days. But 95% of the time, I'm shooting sheet film as sharp as I can get it. I judge the results by the print itself, and couldn't care less how or when the term itself is used, or if it even existed in the first place.
Shooting wide open is just shooting wide open. It isn't being a bokeh fanatic by shooting wide open (see me earlier post). If the lens you're shooting with exhibits "good" bokeh, then you have some very pleasing out-of-focus areas. If not, then they look like a six-bean-chili-and-Colt-Malt-Liquor fart. You should care about the rendering of your OOFAs (how about that as a term to replace bokeh? POOFAS [Pleasing Out-Of-Focus Areas]? or more precisely, QoOOFA [Quality of Out Of Focus Areas]. Try to pronounce QoOOFA and suddenly Bokeh is a lot more appealing), regardless of the aperture selected.