Again, splendid job on your research PHG. Way to lie to wikipedia administration yet again. E. Seldeslachts, wrote the following in that piece in his concluding thoughts: "All but the most generally formulated hypotheses are lacking in proof, including my own"  and O.Guillaume was referring to reasoning based on numismatic evidence, and not just the indian sources you mentioned (p.290, "The End of the Road for the Indo Greeks?".  You clearly missed the point, or refused to accept it, of "The End of the Road for the Indo Greeks". You are misportraying everything, like a journalist taking quotes out of context. You are attempting to veil eurocentrism and couching it in pleasing terms. But the fact remains that you have espoused some of the most racist and biased theories of that period. If those are your opinions, that is your business, but do not thrust them upon wikipedia. 

 As for foreign influences, you are lying about them and misapplying them: 
 1. You commit original research: 
 (, , , , ):  
 2. See mahitgar's comments below. You do not use a lawyer as a source on linguistics.  
 3. Seleucus' campaigns did not take him to the yamuna, and thus, have nothing to do with it 
 4. You are falsely and inaccurately protraying them (as noted throughout our discussionsevidence can be provided for third-parties). 

 That is vandalism. The bottomline is, you are suppressing the facts and imposing your views (NPOV violation). Your map show the entire northern subcontinent under the greeks. It does not show three different projects (you merely claim it does since you stitch together 3 maps). The verbiage in the article proper is straight out of Tarn, period. You use art historians who accept his theories as a buttress (bussagli). The fact remains, this is a biased article with only one point of view: your own. That is a violation of wikipedia's standards and mission statement.