Help correct Wikipedia entries on Hinduism and Vedas

[Guest guest]

==BIASED PRESENTATION OF MATERIAL ON HINDUISM AND INDIA ON

WIKIPEDIA==

 

There is a significant amount of colonial and Christian missionary

or European ethno-centric BIAS that is often presented as superior

"linguistic" evidence in representations of Indian religious scriptures and

history on documents available on Wikipedia. These sources are fundamentally biased and/or

anti-Hindu in nature, as inferred in a March 22, 2007 ruling in a California

court in terming use of these sources in deciding content on Hinduism or India

in public school text books by the California State Education Board. Specifically, the California Board had

previously consulted Harvard Sanskrit Studies Professor Mike Witzel, known for

his anti-Hindu bias. Mike Witzel's

content, and that of his like, is frequently cited in these pages as

"mainstream scholarship".

 

The Wikipedia pages reviewed to have significant bias include,

but not limited to: [[Vedas]], [[RigVeda]], [[Yajur Veda]], [[sama Veda]], [[Atharva

Veda]], [[brahmana]], [[sathpatha-Brahmana]], [[Vedic Period]], [[indo-Aryans]],

[[History of India]], and [[Out of India Theory]].

 

Specifically, here are some of the areas of bias:

 

1. Statements that Vedas were

"composed". I have tried to change it to a neutral "recorded".

This area needs parity with articles on the Koran and Bible

in the Wikepedia. There is not a single reference to "compose"

on Koran or in the first few screens of Bible, and most statements on the Torah

say they were revealed or inspired by God.

 

2. Frequent citation of "mainstream

scholars" or "majority of scholars" everywhere to support the

biased presentations. There is no definition of what

"mainstream" or "majority" means. One administrator [[JFD]]

attempted to define mainstream as material from "peer-reviewed" journals, a

standard that has not been applied for material on other religious literature

on Wikipedia, AND, does not reflect more recent peer reviewed and published

books that have demonstrated the untenable bias of linguistic "scholars" or

Indo European studies scholars.

 

3. Selective immediate refutation of

presentation of newer or scholarship by Indian-origin scholars, right at the

place where a representation is made, in the name of "mainstream

scholars". Such refutation is made

at the bottom of the page, often in a separate section for material on

non-Hindu religions.

 

4. Presentation of biased

representations from Western scholars at the top part of

every page as fact without presenting criticisms of such views.

 

5. Discarding or

"deprecating" astronomical, archeological dating references and

genetic studies in favor of only arguable linguistic assumptions, especially

when much of the linguistic assumptions have since been discredited.

 

6. Assuming that the horse was not in India prior to

2000BC, to support biased claims, despite evidence to the contrary or

attempts to dismiss such evidence without basis.

 

7. Complete absence of citations of

commentaries on the Scriptures by Indian scholars of your like Shankaracharya

and Ramanuja - as if the western Indologists were the first to study or

comment on these scriptures.

 

8. Wikipedia administrators ([[buddhipriya]],

[[JLD]], [[Abecedare]]) have repeatedly reversed

edits to correct bias, raising the possibility that the discredited

"linguistic" studies group mafia has taken control of these pages to perpetuate

bias.

 

Recommendation: These pages must be rewritten from the

scratch to eliminate all bias.