The article is very much making up conclusions not present in the work cited. There were no "wipe outs" or "total turnovers".
Probably some sort of jingoist advocating ethnic cleansing writing articles like this.
We can’t say for certain what the causes were, but there are some very striking near-total population replacements we can infer from DNA analysis, such as the disappearance of Neolithic ancestry in Britain over the span of just a century or two.
Phys.org is good for DOI links to the studies they butcher and nothing else. It makes me cringe every time I see people discussing their writing seriously, but my God they’re a popular domain.
They’re often sensational and frequently inaccurate or misleading, but often the research they cite is worthwhile.
You're right that "wipeouts" and "total population turnover" basically doesn't exist in our genetic history, but there's one critical exception to that rule of thumb: massive epidemics really do wipe out entire local populations, and given that early farming was involved (with its higher pathogen burden) this cannot be ignored as a factor here.