From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is part of the WikiProject for Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors who write Wikipedia's Classics articles. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Visual arts (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Visual arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of visual arts 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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.


Can you help movbe this back? Someone with no information and no experience with the literature on this subject has moved this page from Pasquino, with the result that it now says "Pasquin (Italian Pasquino, Latin Pasquillus) was the name ordinary Romans gave to a battered ancient statue " This is incorrect: the name ordinary Romans gave and still to the battered ancient statue is Pasquino O Knowledgeable reader, can you move this back to its correct title?--Wetman (talk) 15:00, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

restoration in the news[edit] The talking statues are up for restoration, and Italy wants to prohibit the pasquinades on them. For shame. (talk) 23:39, 4 May 2009 (UTC)Ray

Suggestion to split[edit]

The hatnote on this article says it is about a "genre of anonymous lampooning", yet the first paragraph talks about the statue, Pasquino. Perhaps someone added a redirect to have a link to *something* for pasquinade. In any case, we now have two distinct subjects, one about an interesting and arguably relatively important literary genre, and another about the statue where it all began.

Anyone opposed to: Splitting this article into Pasquino and Pasquinade?

These are two distinct subjects, but I think that at present the article is too short to split. I don't see why we shouldn't leave the two subjects in the same article, seeing that they are so closely related. Maybe the content should be reorganized so that the two subjects become more evident. This will make a redirect for Pasquinades that links to a section in the article more useful, which may ultimately lead to more content, thus allowing the articles to be split. Thoughts? My Gussie (talk) 07:08, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
No sign yet that the article is becoming unmanageable. Wetman (talk) 23:34, 5 February 2017 (UTC)