Not exactly sure where you got this information but it isn't actaully accurate and it's information seems to be biased sine it seems to (purposely or not) omit certain things.
For one I noticed that the article left out any prominant Reformed peoples who hold to dispensationalism, but it does include in that list those who are actaully Hyper-dispy (such as Jack Van-Impy and Hal Linsey) and these should not be equated with those of dispensationalism any more than Hyper-Cals should be considered true Calvinists or Reformed. These are go far beyond the common views of dispensationalism. Another you can add to the hyper-dispy view is John Haggie who believes that Israel has a different gospel to be saved by.
But the main issue I have is the incorrectness here is of the historical understanding of the Pre-mil view. It is extremely limited in information concerning this view.
There were a great many others besides Ireneaus and Papias who believed and taught the Pre-mill view as can be seen
here in a previous post of mine. It was consistant and main view (or oxthodox teaching) of the early church till about 450'ish ad (when Augustine made Amil a popular view). Justin Martyr is the one who even specifically states that it was the orthodox teaching of the church at large during his time in the 2nd century.
Secondly, they not 'only' taught about a visible earthly kingdom for a literal 1000 years after the return of Christ (though it is the main points often talked about) but here is a listing of their views as given by church historians from the scholars of the Amil, Pre-mil, and Dispy's
:
1. The anti-christ (a person) would both arise and reign
2. Christ's return physically to earth and the overthrow of the anti-christ.
3. Christ establishing His physical Kingdom on the earth.
4. He would reign from Jerusalem both over and with His saints of all ages.
5. His reign would last a literal 1000 years.
6. There were distinct resurrections. That of the saints before the 1000 year reign and the general - those who would be raised up for Judgment.
I addressed these
in this post on another thread most specifically regarding the Pre-mil view being the undisputed view of the early Church till about 450 ad or so (or the first 300 years of it) till Augustine lead a move away from the orginal orthodox teachings of the church toward an Amil view - as a church teaching on the whole.
The above is actaully the foundations or corner stones of the Dipsy view and as such it is an extension of the pre-mil view but is also distinct from the Pre-mil view in other ways.