The Wikipedia article has citations, which one can follow up on. I would say what is lazy is posting a link to “The Yucatan Times”, not a reputable source on Indian archaeology, without even noticing that that article was sourced from a now-defunct article at New India Express, again not a reputable source on Indian archaeology. That source article, to judge from what was saved at Wayback Machine, does not cite a single scholar’s name or publication in making its claims.