True Trips. But User:Zara1709 is appearently from germany, a country with significant nationalism and holocaust history. These guys usually blame all others to be nationalists.

So i will shrink the "opinion" of Zara to the 3 real points, which were made:
The significant rising of hinduism in 4th century AD. instead of 2nd c. BC
content about buddhism-related stuff were deleted
Asoka's "character change" from converted buddhist to buddhist patronizer

1.) The gupta's were the once, who made hinduism established in northern india. This was done by patronizing the Sanskrit language. Previous religions got lesser attention since then. Gupta's were the Hindu patronizers. So this is the time of the rise of "modern Hinduism" in India, which took place til the use of Sanskrit language was minimized in the later middle ages due to persian and other ethnicity's rulers.
2.) This article should present the History of Hinduism, NOT the "history of buddhism", or the "history of buddhism in India". Therefore very special related buddhism stuff were removed. I didn't look at the muslim part in the article so far, but it should be done either way.
3.) Of course Asoka was once converted to buddhism. But since then he had sent his buddhist monks to all parts of his empire. He wrote his beliefs into the edicts of ashoka, which reflect his buddhist identity. He patronized buddhism. Since he was buddhist by heart, there was nothing to mention about him regarding hinduism apart of the contemporary compiled Sanskrit literature of oral tradition. I know, many indians would like to see him as hindu patronizer, but he wasn't at all. These were only the Guptas and Pallavas in ancient days.

Large parts of these points can be seen here:
http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761555715_9/hinduism.html

I hate it, when people from germany or german speaking people, especially those, who claim theirselves Aryans, make history articles in the indian section.