"
 ""Reputable sources, i.e. peer reviewed ones. None of the links above qualifies as such. Just because something has an URL doesn't make it a ""source"". I can put up a geocities page with a giant title ""Witzel is stupid"" in blinking pink letters. That doesn't make it a ""source""– So you are arbitrarily rejecting a whole bunch of critical books as being ""un- reputable""? 
Also, ""well, western scholarship is indebted to the critical method, not to a lineage of gurus. This implies the principle of standing on the shoulders of giants. We are indebted to Oldenberg for foundational insights, but we know more than him. No westerner worth his salt will defend a statement based on ipse dixit alone.""– If this in't racist and prejudiced, I don't know what is! If you believe that the Indian scholarship is not capable of and western scholarship is indeed alone capable of this ""critical method"", I don't see why you should even edit the Indian articles, because you will be continuing to do so under such heavy-weight bias!Talk "