That sort of makes sense. Think of something like this. "The Blue Group will be performing in your home town tomorrow night. The Blue Group includes John the Juggler, Ryan the Rocketman, and Gina the Gorilla-fighter!" This seems to imply that John, Ryan, and Gina are the only members of The Blue Group. Comprises would probably be the better word to use here, but includes doesn't seem to out of place. Dictionary.com has more about the controversy: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/includes
Sorry, but no. The "controversy", if you can call it that, is whether or not it is proper to use "includes" with a list that is complete-- everybody agrees that it is the best choice for an incomplete list. Check your link again.
Seriously: if I said "The science faculty includes two Nobel Laureates", would you really think that there were only two professors on staff?
It's a nonsensical argument at best-- and when folks attempt to use it to argue against common sense (like stating that the United States does not include the 50 States), reason is left whimpering in the corner.
