No, of course not.
Let simple say ISO is not quite a value, even in the digital word.
ISO is a spectrum, on film ranging from -2 to +3 exposure value, on digital much more less close to +/- 2/3 EV.
If we are not speaking of forensic photography it matters to understand exposure, where to place the spectrum regarding the actual lighting situation.
But here we are at the „expert photographer„ and the very basic information is missing.
Someone believe that what is stated here is truth and go on, and chimp after every photo.

In many instances, the US use correct spellings and names. This must be pointed out. Realize should be spelled with a ‘z’ for instance (realizzare in Italian which comes straight from Latin – we use 2 for that matter but the Brits seem preferring an ‘s’ every now and then). Indeed Via is pronounced correctly in the US but not in the UK. Mind you that the UK is undergoing a huge transformation with the English language as is being contaminated by different accents now (like the one where the ‘T’ have gone suddenly missing to name one). Soccer was the original British word which the US still uses and the UK has dropped in favour of Football (which in the US is still what it used to be in the UK before). As you can see, there’s a lot out there that undergo distortion unfortunately (as I cannot find a better word to describe this). Interesting enough in the US the word Nikkor is often pronounced correctly (with an E sound as it should be). Talking about Nikon, I hope they dig themselves out of the hole they’re in at the moment as this is an historic brand, one I would hate seeing going away. Take care.

Hi, Dan. The full description of ISO on Wikipedia as you cited, states: “A system for quantifying the sensitivity (“speed”) of a photographic emulsion, or a solid-state digital-camera’s image sensor, to visible light. Normally followed by a numerical value, e.g.: ISO 100 or ISO 64/19°. Developed from the ASA and the DIN systems by the International Organization for Standardization.” ISO was developed from systems created by the International Organization for Standardization.
If you read this definition and the definition provided in our article they are the same thing essentially. Our article is in layman’s terms so it can be easily understood. Our word order for the International Organization for Standardization is incorrect in the article but it is not so misconstrued that it is indecipherable. We not only explain what ISO is but, there are even explanations for when each value is ideal.

ISO in photography is not International Standards Organization.
ISO in photography is A system for quantifying the sensitivity (“speed”) of a photographic emulsion, or a solid-state digital-camera’s image sensor, to visible light. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_abbreviations_in_photography
You are not aware for what stands ISO and you do not explain what is ISO, you just say that ISO can have different values, that is not an explanation.
So again plain non expert.

Hello, Dan. I believe this question was answered at the beginning of this article. “Section 1 – What exactly is ISO? The ISO (International Standards Organization) determines the sensitivity of the sensor in your camera which, in turn, affects the exposure of your photos.” Is this what you were looking for?