Yes, here is some further evidence,
In the original Hebrew text, the fourteenth chapter of Isaiah
is not about a fallen angel, but about a fallen Babylonian king, who during his lifetime had persecuted the children of Israel. It contains no mention of Satan, either by name or reference. The Hebrew scholar could only speculate that some early Christian scribes, writing in the Latin tongue used by the Church, had decided for themselves that they wanted the story to be about a fallen angel, a creature not even mentioned in the original Hebrew text, and to whom they gave the name "Lucifer."
....
The scholars authorized by King James I to translate the Bible into then current English did not use the original Hebrew texts, but used versions translated largely by St. Jerome in the fourth century. Jerome had mistranslated the Hebraic metaphor
, "Day star, son of the Dawn," as
"Lucifer," and
over the centuries a metamorphosis took place. Lucifer the morning star became a disobedient angel, cast out of heaven to rule eternally in hell. Theologians, writers, and poets interwove the myth with the doctrine of the Fall, and in Christian tradition Lucifer is now the same as Satan, the Devil, and, ironically, the Prince of Darkness.
http://jdstone.org/cr/files/luciferaproblemforchristianity.html
Is Lucifer actually Satan?
No.
Its the king of Babylon. Either Nebuchadnezzar or his grandson Belshazzar.