![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The attached distribution graph in Russian does neither cite any sources or dates, and thus does not meet the least wiki standards. HJJHolm ( talk) 08:44, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
Finnic is a bad term for uralic speaker, it is a oldgermanic word. Better is uralic People or Pre-Saami or so. The westfinnic coast stay to this time under northern culture influence. They gave this land the name "Finnland". The romanian historic had not understand that Finnic people are Northgermans and Saami are Uralic People. They called the uralic peoples as Finns. A new study say, the volosov-culture was east-uralic speakers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.252.65.44 ( talk) 02:18, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
I found no attstation for barrows in the Fat'yanovo Culture in Anthony (2007). On the contrary, on page 380 he only describes "flat-grave cemeteries". If no better source is given this probably mistaken word will be cancelled. HJJHolm ( talk) 07:04, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
The "cited" Saag (2020) gives other dates, "So far, only 14 radiocarbon dates have been published for Fatyanovo Culture, placing it to 2,750–2,500 (2,300) cal BC [21. = Krenke, N. A. Радиоуглеродная хронология фатьяновской культуры. Российская Археология 110–116 (2019) doi:10.31857/S086960630004830-2.]" - Note that the dates (reinforced by me) disagree. Please, correct. 2A02:8108:9640:AC3:847C:A851:2FD:D19F ( talk) 06:58, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
Not mixed with Volosovo? Volosovo had at least one example of R1a-Z93 in I20762_I20784. HJHolm ( talk) 07:30, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
This study has table 20 and table 22 and a direct quote on pigment yet you only go by table 2 as if table 20 doesn't clearly show three blondes, and five blue eyed which is an or a third just like the quote and the new Harvard study shows five of 13 sintashta were blonde 68.1.191.4 ( talk) 01:24, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
Maybe it's mentioned somewhere else in the article, and I missed it, but I checked in the language section and there is nothing written about the Indo-Iranian connection to the Fatyanovo-Balanovo CW group. Personally it seems bizarre that this is not mentioned given what appears to be the overwhelming breadth of the evidence pointing to the FBC as the origin of the Indo-Iranian branching-off. I recall there being something mentioned in this section at one point, but for whatever reason it appears to have been removed. 69.193.9.242 ( talk) 23:23, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The attached distribution graph in Russian does neither cite any sources or dates, and thus does not meet the least wiki standards. HJJHolm ( talk) 08:44, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
Finnic is a bad term for uralic speaker, it is a oldgermanic word. Better is uralic People or Pre-Saami or so. The westfinnic coast stay to this time under northern culture influence. They gave this land the name "Finnland". The romanian historic had not understand that Finnic people are Northgermans and Saami are Uralic People. They called the uralic peoples as Finns. A new study say, the volosov-culture was east-uralic speakers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.252.65.44 ( talk) 02:18, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
I found no attstation for barrows in the Fat'yanovo Culture in Anthony (2007). On the contrary, on page 380 he only describes "flat-grave cemeteries". If no better source is given this probably mistaken word will be cancelled. HJJHolm ( talk) 07:04, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
The "cited" Saag (2020) gives other dates, "So far, only 14 radiocarbon dates have been published for Fatyanovo Culture, placing it to 2,750–2,500 (2,300) cal BC [21. = Krenke, N. A. Радиоуглеродная хронология фатьяновской культуры. Российская Археология 110–116 (2019) doi:10.31857/S086960630004830-2.]" - Note that the dates (reinforced by me) disagree. Please, correct. 2A02:8108:9640:AC3:847C:A851:2FD:D19F ( talk) 06:58, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
Not mixed with Volosovo? Volosovo had at least one example of R1a-Z93 in I20762_I20784. HJHolm ( talk) 07:30, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
This study has table 20 and table 22 and a direct quote on pigment yet you only go by table 2 as if table 20 doesn't clearly show three blondes, and five blue eyed which is an or a third just like the quote and the new Harvard study shows five of 13 sintashta were blonde 68.1.191.4 ( talk) 01:24, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
Maybe it's mentioned somewhere else in the article, and I missed it, but I checked in the language section and there is nothing written about the Indo-Iranian connection to the Fatyanovo-Balanovo CW group. Personally it seems bizarre that this is not mentioned given what appears to be the overwhelming breadth of the evidence pointing to the FBC as the origin of the Indo-Iranian branching-off. I recall there being something mentioned in this section at one point, but for whatever reason it appears to have been removed. 69.193.9.242 ( talk) 23:23, 12 October 2023 (UTC)