|WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome||(Rated Start-class, Low-importance)|
|WikiProject Visual arts||(Rated Start-class)|
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
http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2009/05/04/talking-statues-rome.html The talking statues are up for restoration, and Italy wants to prohibit the pasquinades on them. For shame. 188.8.131.52 (talk) 23:39, 4 May 2009 (UTC)Ray
Suggestion to split
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)