Talk:Apennine culture

Archaeology Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Archaeology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Archaeology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchaeologyWikipedia:WikiProject ArchaeologyTemplate:WikiProject ArchaeologyArchaeology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Italy Low‑importance

	Italy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Italy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Italy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ItalyWikipedia:WikiProject ItalyTemplate:WikiProject ItalyItaly articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Indo-European immigration

Pallatino is completely ad-hoc phantasy: In the Neolithic, there were no IW-s. And Italic has by far more connections with Celtic than with Greek, thus, this theory is nonsense. HJJHolm (talk) 15:14, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The relationship between Italic and Celtic languages is unproven. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.128.225.124 (talk) 18:14, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Age

3050±2000 BC is an unidentifiable typo. HJJHolm (talk) 07:35, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Moreover, the dates given here differ extremely from those in the it.wikipedia. Whom can we trust? HJJHolm (talk) 09:12, 24 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Imputations of ethnicity

Pallattino's hypotheses are outdated and far outsiede of all modern assumptions of linguistic relationship. In particular, the Italic Indo-European language group is related either close to Celtic or Germanic, not to Greek, wich is clearly an Eastern Indo-European Sub-Group. He and the writer of this article has no evidence whatever for the contents. HJJHolm (talk) 07:50, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]