Talk:Porzhensky Pogost

	Architecture portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture 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.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Russia: Physical geography Low‑importance

	Russia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the physical geography of Russia task force.

Third opinion on the photos

Saw this via WP:ANI. Edit warring and talking of being "punished" aside (which can be discussed at ANI), I thought I'd offer a third opinion on the photos. Ideally, the article would have all three: interior, exterior at ground level, and aerial. If choosing two, I think I'd go with the aerial and the ceiling. There are technical issues with the photo, yes, but it gives a better overall impression of the site. It also looks like it was improved in the time between the photos (or at least painted?), and so having a more recent one is a benefit there, too. But my main reason is the perspective it gives. For what it's worth. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 13:45, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, appreciated.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:07, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW I agree with Rhododendrites: the newer photo is more useful even though the older photo looks better. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 16:58, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]