Talk:San Giorgio Maggiore (church), Venice

Architecture High‑importance

	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
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Catholicism Low‑importance

San Giorgio Maggiore (church), Venice is within the scope of WikiProject Catholicism, an attempt to better organize and improve the quality of information in articles related to the Catholic Church. For more information, visit the project page.CatholicismWikipedia:WikiProject CatholicismTemplate:WikiProject CatholicismCatholicism

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Catholicism task list:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : see Draft articles
Assess : see Category:Unassessed Catholicism articles; Category:Unknown-importance Catholicism articles
Cleanup : Blessed Virgin Mary (see the talk page)
Collaborate : Invitation template needed, see Category:WikiProject invitation templates
Copyedit : Cuthbert Tunstall
Expand : Angelus; Roman Catholicism in Kosovo; Bishop Adolph John Paschang; Cum sæpe accidere; Altar Society; American Board of Catholic Missions; Bernard Häring
NPOV : Americanism (heresy); Ensoulment
Photo : see Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of Catholicism
Stubs : see Category:Stub-Class Catholicism articles; Category:Catholic Church stubs
Update : Peer review; John Aloysius Maguire
Verify : Archdiocese of Glasgow; Archbishop of Westminster; Bishop; Saint Mungo; Sanctification; Westminster Cathedral
Other : Watch recent changes for Catholicism articles

Historic sites Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Historic sites, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of historic sites 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.Historic sitesWikipedia:WikiProject Historic sitesTemplate:WikiProject Historic sitesHistoric sites
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Italy Mid‑importance

	Italy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Italy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Italy 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.ItalyWikipedia:WikiProject ItalyTemplate:WikiProject ItalyItaly
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

[Untitled]

I have inserted a photograph showing the church in full sun. I am working on some improvements to the article. Waysider1925 (talk) 14:32, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Photographs

Attilios has removed a photograph for the second time. Each time he left a photograph which in my view was a less good picture than the one he preferred to keep.

I have restored the introductory picture which I consider to provide an excellent view of the church on a sunny evening when it looks its best. I see no harm in leaving the other picture in the info-box, particularly as it shows the whole island as well as the church (as stated in the caption) but if he feels impelled to delete one of them, it is the picture in the infobox which ought to go. Do not put the first picture in the infobox. It needs to be bigger to make an impact and to introduce the reader to the church with an image that does not necessarily have to be enlarged.

Regarding the Sebastiano Ricci painting, I have left that on the right - I hope to add more reproductions of paintings later - but it ought to be smaller than the major picture of the interior, especially as anybody interested in the painting will need to enlarge the image in any event.

Waysider1925 (talk) 11:35, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to point out - for casual readers - that you're basically trying to insert your own picture at the top of the article. [This one]. A fairly shoddy image shot on film in 1988; washed-out, covered in hairs. Lots of barrel distortion, lots of vignetting. The colour balance is such that it looks to have been shot on the coldest day of the year. It looks awful and the scan is terrible as well. I'm sure you had a great time in Venice. -Ashley Pomeroy (talk) 07:21, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In fact it took about ten minutes to vastly improve this with photoshop, here, working from a low-res copy, except that the original scan is of such poor quality that further work is futile. -Ashley Pomeroy (talk) 07:33, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I added the picture (admittedly my own) because I thought and still think that it was a better picture than the one previously used. If you have a picture which you think is clearly better, you are welcome to substitute it. I do not pretend to be a professional photographer or even a skilled amateur. Perhaps my skin is too thin, but I do feel your comments are unnecessarily rude and oblivious of the obligation to be courteous. I always have a great time in Venice which I have visited about 30 times since 1980; but I do not understand what your commment is meant to imply. Unfortunately advancing age is making it more difficult to jump into boats and I have not been back since I started editing this article. I fully agree that you have improved the picture, but you do not seem to have placed the improved version in the article, which I hope you will do. More and better photos of the paintings are also badly needed to illustrate the article.

Waysider1925 (talk) 18:13, 19 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]