Again, Hindi and Urdu are not 2 languages with shared lineage. They were one and the same language until about 1850 until Britains choice of using the Arabic script for administering India angered the Hindus.

Yes there were cultural/academic differences and many different dialects of Hindi. Kabir sounds very different from Ghalib. But for the man on the street there was no difference. At most, you can argue that Urdu is the most popular dialect of Hindi. It wouldn't be correct, but less wrong.

Hyderabadi and Tamil Muslims speak a dialect of Hindi that they call urdu that would make Ghalib spin in his grave.

Differences within Urdu/Hindi are far more tremendous than the Hindi Urdu split. Calling them separate languages is crazy.

It's a cultural standard. Muslims call their language Urdu. Hindus call it Hindi. The language is the same, whatever you call it.

The Wikipedia article does not support your argument. It merely relates the history of the bifurcation primary driven by differences in script and religion. I am well versed with the history of Hindi and Urdu going beyond this Wikipedia article.

If you want to make your argument rigorous please give an estimate of pure textbook Hindi speakers (people who use avashya instead of zaroor, hriday instead of Dil outside academics and newspapers) and "hindustani" speakers.

My conservative estimate is less than 10M for "pure Hindi" and greater than 300M for regular hindi/Urdu.

This is because virtually every one from North India and Pakistan speaks the so called Hindi/Urdu mixed language. I have also met bhojpuri, awadhi, marwari speakers but I am yet to meet the mythical pure Hindi speaker and I am a really old guy.

> while completely ignoring all else that makes a language.

What else makes a language? Syntax? Hindi and Urdu have almost identical syntax. There are more syntactical differences between Hindi and Punjabi than there are between Hindi and Urdu.