Talk:Mandorla

Wikimedia
I am seeking images of a mandorla. --Spesek 20:52, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
 * See Image:Virgen de guadalupe.jpg for a pretty good idea of what one looks like.--Rockero 21:45, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I was taught that a Mandorla looks like 2 crossing/interlocking rings. --Spesek 15:09, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

German article
I took a bit of content from de:Mandorla, but I don't have the energy to do a complete translation right now. I'll probably come back later and complete it. --Slashme (talk) 14:06, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
 * It's a solid start. Great work! Majoreditor (talk) 17:14, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

merge from vesica piscis
The two pages are about exactly same shape. - Altenmann >talk 19:53, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Bad idea
The idea to merge the Vesica piscis and Mandorla articles does not make sense. One is dealing with a geometrical form as understood by science and mathematics, the other with a theological form as understood by Christianity. Merging the two risks creating confusion between two diametrically different concepts that just happen to share a similar physical form. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.216.88.114 (talk) 09:59, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

Against a merge
As 83.216.88.114 said, the articles cover different aspects, even if a mandorla, in the context of art, should prove to be an element from a vesica piscis construction. Not that I don't see the resemblance, I just don't know if it is an established fact. Although a mandorla resemble the vesica piscis section it is not given they are congruent. Holiness is historically associated with radiance, which is what the mandorla illustrates. Of cause I recognize the numerous historical representations of the vesica piscis constructions, but the vesica piscis section has signature proportions which must be matched in the relevant works of art in order to say they are related. Furthermore, the name vesica piscis does not refer to the almond shaped section, but to the whole construction of two overlapping circles, and for that reason alone, merging the articles is out of the question. The proposal should be taken down. Carystus (talk) 15:29, 17 January 2019 (UTC)