"
JanetteDoe, I appreciate your finding and uploading the Rao articles.  However, this can easily become an endless discussion.  For some other Yadav-apologist will soon come along and find an even more obscure source than Rao, and then you—conscientious and rigorous to a degree that the Yadav apologists are not and have no intention, aware or unaware, of being—will go scurrying again for the article.  After that we all will try to interpret it, weighing the pros and cons, again to a degree the apologists will not, for they will be busy looking for the next roadblock to toss in our path.  

I think we can't make the determination of whether Rao applies here or not, at least not yet.  Let the secondary sources do that.  We need to rely on recent scholarship, especially that in textbooks, published by academic presses and vetted both before and after publication by reviewers from a wide range of scholarly and journalistic backgrounds.  Two such books, by Susan Bayly and Christophe Jaffrelot, both widely used in universities around the world, both reviewed extensively in the literature, are being used in the article.  Let the article writing (or rewriting) proceed based on these (or similar) books.  Once the article has been fleshed out, we can come back to the issue of Rao.  Otherwise, nothing will get done, and those of us, who've taken time out from our other Wikipedia (not to speak RL) pursuits to attend to the article, will slowly walk away, out of touch and out of sympathy.  «Talk» "