Talk:Chalcolithic Europe

Merging with Neolithic Europe
Maybe I am stating the obvious: the article of Neolithic Europe does not contain any actual/extensive information on Chalcolithic Europe so far, nor I can see any reason why it should. The topic of Ch. Eu. is quite abundant by itself, and deserves its own article. Omnipedian (talk) 04:13, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

=
====================

As long as Chalcolithic refers to the article.. I would say don't change (It is distinguished from Neolithic as a later period)

greetzz Goodies —Preceding unsigned comment added by Goodies (talk • contribs) 12:49, 11 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I would like to point out that the Chalcolithic is not considered part of the Neolithic at all, but a stage of the Bronze Age, and it is often difficult to distinguish it from the following periods, as pointed out in the linked article. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 05:22, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

funny article
Here is the FREE encyclopedia! The lead section is probably only intelligible for people with special senses - i don't get it at all. But even better is the first section as it says: ....actually for the people of this period more important than the use of copper was the introduction of horses. The text just runs free from there. Learnt a lot about kurgans, though...very amused. ATB Wikirictor (talk) 00:22, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

funny article 2020
The dates are way of, vinca is not even mentioned

This bad page should be merged with the high quality https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metallurgy_during_the_Copper_Age_in_Europe — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.46.1.100 (talk) 07:49, 24 July 2020 (UTC)