Talk:Geghard

photos
Sorry Serouj, I reverted your edit. The reason Geghard is a UNESCO site is because it is rock-cut, more than anything else. The top photo shows one of the rock-cut rooms very nicely, whereas the photo you were replacing it with is just another picture of a beautiful Armenian monastery (though a pixelated one at that). There are well over a hundred beautiful monasteries, but this is what makes Geghard special. The second photo you replaced showed the height of the sheer cliffs in the canyon, another very impressive feature. Much more impressive I think than a three-color flat closeup map mostly in Armenian showing the location. --RaffiKojian (talk) 21:42, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi Raffi, good points, but I think we need a picture of the monastic complex itself in its appropriate section and we need a better shot of the interior (without the guy in the pic) :). Thanks.  Serouj (talk) 03:27, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I just realized the first two pics are by you. Good job and thanks for sharing them.  I found a better picture of the first on Flickr so I hope you don't mind my changing it... Serouj (talk) 03:30, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, the new clean pic is better - it's great you found it. It was a really tough low light shot to capture, and you can imagine I was a bit disappointed a random guy was in my best pic :-)  A general view of the monastery would be a nice addition, if I dig one up I'll upload it...  --RaffiKojian (talk) 15:27, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Please don't speculate about why Geghard is a world heritage site. The decision itself clearly states: "The Committee decided to inscribe this property on the World Heritage List on the basis of criterion (ii): The Monastery of Geghard, with its remarkable rock-cut churches and tombs, is an exceptionally well preserved and complete example of medieval Armenian monastic architecture and decorative art, with many innovatory features which had a profound influence on subsequent developments in the region."

Thus, rock-cut is a special feature but not the only reason. I believe the present title image very well shows the overall arrangement of the buildings. --Bjs (talk) 11:35, 22 November 2017 (UTC)