I like this answer best.
Even if it is wrong? The voltage of the capacitor will approach the source voltage asymptotically.
But, as Ratch says, it's the transfer of charge from one plate to the other.
No, I don't say that. The verb charge has no place in describing the unbalancing of electron quantities on capacitor plates.
I know you know that, but the wording was misleading.
Does he?
However, unlike Ratch, I have no problem with using the word "charged" to describe what happens to a capacitor. We should all know what the word means. Charging, after all, always involves moving charge from one place to another, in some sense.
Does it? If you send electrons along a wire, is the wire charging, or conducting?
Try saying "energized" ... and no matter how "correct" that might be, you are more likely to confuse people.
Why should that be? Unless they had the wrong conception in the first place.
There are many ways to energize something, including heating it,
Surely nobody is going to assume the capacitor is being thermally energized.
throwing it, or attaching it to a sling shot prior to launching it at a house to cause some mischief.
Surely nobody is going to assume the capacitor is being mechanically energized.
Surely everyone is going to assume the capacitor is being electrically energized because it is an electrical storage device. It is being charged with electrical energy, or in other words, energized.
Ratch