This article is within the scope of WikiProject World Heritage Sites, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of World Heritage Sites 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.World Heritage SitesWikipedia:WikiProject World Heritage SitesTemplate:WikiProject World Heritage SitesWorld Heritage Sites articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements 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.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities articles
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
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
In 1911 this would not have become a World Heritage Site. Since then extensive work has been done on the prehistory. The ancient city was one of the largest in Italy. Prehistoric remains on the Moneterozzi go back to the Old Stone Age. The first known hut on Civita dates to the late 10th. That section needs to be expanded. I know Britannica is typically used as a fill-in for many topics. What's the good of that? Anyone can read Britannica 1911 online; WP adds nothing there; in fact, it takes away from the Britannica article. It isn't done as well. So, it is time to get on with this if good and accurate articles in this area are of interest to anyone. Oh, dab, I appreciate your desire for a stable article. You have to do what you have to do, but, keep in mind, what good is a stable wrong article? Are you perpetuating the stability of errors? The layout is going in the right direction, I think. More graphics could be added if the article were longer. So, I would recommend, division into more subsections, expansion of the prehistory, addition of adequate notes. Oh, by the way, I can understand the criticism of Corneto for changing its name to Tarquinia. The fascists did do that. The problem is, so has everyone else done it. Every town-sized community in the vicinity of an ancient one changes its name back to the ancient. That statement should come out. WP should not be anti-fascist per se. Why single them out? Their day of glory is fast receding into the dim historical past (like me). One more point if you please. Corneto is not Tarquinia. It is not on the site, it did not develop from it, it is not in the same location. It is true there is some Protovillanovan under Corneto. In the PV, the whole region was covered with villages. Postscript: as far as the prehistory of Italy is concerned, Tarquinia is not of mid-importance. Finds there are pretty weighty and Massimo Pallottino did some of his early work there. Ciao.Dave (talk) 13:30, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
