Well, since
SOMEONE opened a "can of worms"
My gneral principle is, unless it is hideously and obviously wrong and/or "deceptive" if that is what your tradition calls it, if that's the character they use, etc.... I have no problem with it. There is a LOT of variation within even tight lineages, a HUGE system is going to have more
This is the bone I picked (rather clean) with Doc Fai Wong in SF one year, with his "I have all the correct answers/I'm special" crap.... yeah, it's nice you have the original Kuen Po, there are still a lot of illiterate farmers who can't even read, much less write, who would still kick your donkey across the bay
The character we use not only means "sweep", it has the hand radical. You'll notice that the character LKH's site uses also has the hand radical. LInguitically speaking, this makes a lot of sense....
The character presented as the "correct one" by someone
From the "concise Chinese dictionary" printed in Hong Kong 1995
(n) an outpost, a guard station, a whistle
(v) whistle, patrol, act as scout
Not only does the character LACK the hand radical, it's radical is in fact a "sound preserver" and isn't usually associated with ACTION
The definition also doesn't really fit
My bet, I'd bet at least $5, is that it is a "white character". If you don't know what a "white character" is, I'd suggest you not debate "correct characters". It would be like a grade school kid debating quantum physics, ie no tools to grasp the subject at hand