Your definition is misleading and I question your suitability to teach anyone English vocabulary.
You define a maniac as a "lunatic" or "crazy person" with no reference to the dictionary from which you got said definition, but then use words such as pyromaniac, megalomaniac as examples of the word. So that means that it is the definition of a maniac as:
A person who has an excessive enthusiasm or desire for something
from The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, 4th Edition
not as a "lunatic" which is:
A person who is affected by lunacy; a mentally deranged person.
from American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Fifth Edition
If you don't know the obvious differences between being deranged and having an irresistible compulsion then how can you teach English language?
Also I don't see any etymology of the word here or words which have the same root nor are the synonym and antonyms present. So what kind of education are you actually providing?
My vocab malpractice:
EXT. Street corner in a shady part of town. Under a broken green neon-sign thats blinking.
JIMMY and RAY two "street-people" stand on the corner, they are looking quite nervous.
JIMMY
-You can trust Johnny, he's just a normal maniac not a complete lunatic.
RAY
-I'm not sure last time I saw him he was waving a knife around, saying I owed him 20 dollars...
JIMMY
-Awww c'mon, relax man! Johnny was on bath-salts that time, everybody gets like that on bath-salts.
Thanks for your input, but after a few decades of teaching English and editing English publications, I can assure you, I am qualified to teach English vocab. Particularly to ESL students.
As for my not including the proper and actual "dictionary" definitions, I did that intentionally. When I originally compiled the material that became "Vocab-ability," my intention was to make it understandable for those students for whom English was not their native tongue. Consequently, I made an extra effort to keep the definitions easily understandable.
I can assure you that while those definitions found in the American Heritage Dictionary or Merriam-Webster might be useful for native speakers, those definitions will not help beginner-level or mid-level ESL students. In fact, such "native-speaker-level" definitions will only serve to confuse lower- or mid-level ESL students.
As it is, Vocab-ability can help mid-level or advanced-level students learn and improve their vocabulary by introducing them to the target vocab in a clear and accessible way. It is not intended to teach them the subtle nuances of the target words, nor the etymology. That would only confuse most students. And that's not the way to learn a second language. As a teacher of English and a student of 3 other languages, I can assure you that I know about effective language-acquisition techniques.
Also, if you believe that the 4 examples / target words do not typify "crazed person" or "lunatic." then how would you define them? For instance, would you define a pyromaniac as someone who just happens to have excessive enthusiasm for fire? That would be of no benefit to most ESL students.
Finally, the point of the original Vocab-ability publication, of these Vocab-ability posts, and of the Vocab Practice exercises is to introduce learners to the vocab roots and to help them learn. And many have benefited from Vocab-ability.
And believe me, I can teach not only vocabulary, but grammar, writing, and more. Much more. Very effectively, and with solid results. Many of my students could attest to that.
Does that answer your question about my "suitability"?
Hmmm, I guess "malpractice" is as good as practice – at least in this case.