Talk:Putto

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.Visual artsWikipedia:WikiProject Visual artsTemplate:WikiProject Visual artsvisual arts articles

Religion: Interfaith Low‑importance

	Religion portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is within the scope of Interfaith work group, a work group which is currently considered to be inactive.

Christianity Low‑importance

	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity 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.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Mythology Low‑importance

	Mythology portal This article is supported by WikiProject Mythology. This project provides a central approach to Mythology-related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the WikiProject page for more details.MythologyWikipedia:WikiProject MythologyTemplate:WikiProject MythologyMythology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Photos

This article could be vastly improved with a photo or two... -Tim Rhymeless (Er...let's shimmy) 08:22, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The Italian entry has a couple. Pingku 03:45, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merge?

I agree with the proposed merger with "Amoretti" and there is also an agreement on the talk page for the redirect "Putti."Jlittlet 17:09, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

cupidons

I thought that those winged babies are called Cupidons in art. Anyone can clarify? Pictureuploader 22:29, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They're called a lot of things. Goldfritha 02:05, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't strike anyone that there might be a relationship between putto and puto, meaning a boy prostitute? Just as infantilised representations of Cupid might have seemed more acceptable than a literally eager (i.e., aroused) depiction of the Roman god Cupidus, the personification of adolescent lust. Must just be me then.

Nuttyskin (talk) 11:27, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Amoretto vs. Putto

I just wanted to say you, that amor or amoretto is not the same then putto. Becouse putto means in italian young boy and he atcs exsatcly in christian mithology and iconography. And Amor (in ancient Greece Eros), was a son of Venus (gr. Aphrodite) -and this is greek and later roman mithology - so please, don't make the same becouse is not the same - and I please you, bring your picture Venus with putto, out. Becouse he's not a putto bot an amor. Thank you. And I apologize for my bad English, but I really just can not see the mistake like this is.--Amazone7 01:41, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the two articles should remain seperate, with links pointing to one another. MishaPan (talk) 21:20, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you are familiar with the "eight trigrams" (the bagua) -the image of The Lake bears Heaven. Heaven is tied to Neptune as the lake is tied to Venus. For that matter, the putto-be it an amoretto, a cherub or a Buddha is not necessarily gender specific. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.107.189.66 (talk) 23:47, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Too colloquial?

Doesn't the narrative of this article seem a bit too colloquial? "It would be too much to name..." etc. This seems to have been written by a fan of these statues or something, rather than a scholar. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.46.123.4 (talk) 21:09, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation page

Hello everyone,

I don't know how to do this, but I think there should be a disambiguation page for Amoretti, e.g.

Amoretti = figure in Renaissance architecture, see Putto

Amoretti = sonnet cycle by Edmund Spenser, see Amoretti (poem)

Or something similar. Could somebody do this, please? Carmencantora (talk) 22:12, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]