Talk:Jing'an Temple

Please be more thoughtful when undoing others' work

SudoGhost, I left the following post on your talk page to address your reversion of my photos. I felt my comments were fair and reasonable. But you simply deleted them from your talk page without any thoughtful reply and re-did your reversion without addressing my point of photo quality. Not every edit must gain the consensus of all possible viewers of the page. Can you explain your actions in some detail?

Please be more thoughtful when undoing others' work

Hi, I replaced 2 existing photos with new photos on this page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jing'an_Temple on July 8 2012. I happened to come back to the page days later and noticed that you have reverted my changes with the comment "Reverted to revision 500400203 by 69.146.88.145: Unexplained replacement of images with editor's own images."

The purpose of wikipedia is to publish the best information to the world. I appreciate people like you who actively maintain the site and make the content great, but your method in this case was a bit dogmatic.

• If you compare the old and the new photos of the seated Buddha, the old photo was a dim side view that was difficult to understand what you were looking at, but the new photo shows a well lit front view with people for scale comparison and the people interacting with the statue. The composition of the new photo is also more dynamic.

• Same with the Guanyin Goddess photo. The old photo was poorly lite and the statue looked dry and gloomy. The new photo is much better lit, shows almost the entire room, the statue appears to have had a new glossy coat of finish, and the room glows in the Buddhist yellow.

It is certainly my oversight that I didn't add better comments when I replaced the photos. However, an objective before/after comparison will make the reason fairly obvious. Further, the fact I took these photos would not matter if the comparison was objective.

Reverting to the old photos simply due to "Unexplained replacement of images with editor's own images" without examining the content is not constructive to the goal of publishing the best information. It is certainly my assumption that you didn't compare the content since you focused on my comment quality rather than photo quality.

Lastly, I would assume the 80/20 rule applies here where 80% of the contributors are infrequent and don't actively come back to revisit their contribution, and 20% actively check the pages they are interested in each day. I am in the 80%, and this is the majority. Coming back to revisit the page again today was an accident. If I didn't see your reversion then it could have been a long time before these old photos were replaced by better photos from others. And during this period, the quality of the page would have suffered.

I did undo your reversion just now, but I don't plan to have an "undo fight" with you. I took time to leave this comment because I feel you genuinely have the best interest of wikipedia at heart. If after an objective review, you still revert to the old photos, I will leave it at that, and life will go on.

Ctny (talk) 06:10, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

This was hardly a matter that needed discussion. The replacement photos are clearly better in every way. They are of higher resolution, they show more details, they represent the subject well, they look better within the context of the article. Anyone can see that!

As far as I can see SudoGhost has made no contribution to this article whatsoever, with the exception of reverting theses changes.

Amandajm (talk) 02:11, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jing'an Temple. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140413180020/http://shanghai.heliohost.org/tourist-attractions-in-shanghai/ to http://shanghai.heliohost.org/tourist-attractions-in-shanghai/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:56, 25 December 2017 (UTC)