1) forget any "rules" like the so called rule of thirds (actually derived from how much weight a roof can support of all things and it isn't even thirds but 1 to 1.61..... - an irrational fraction). In this case you have an image in which that is improper in any event; the idea of the rule is that you have a single subject that you put at the "thirds" intersection (in this case the entire building is the subject - to apply the rule here you would have to see the building from far away, by itself in a field ...)
2) you have two different stories told by the crop - the original dark, dank, dilapidated 4 window shot that looks like an abandoned building crowded among other buildings and the brighter, 3 window shot that looks like it is apart from other buldings
Why did you crop that window out? What did that add to the picture?
Why did you brighten it like that? what does that add to the picture?
When I teach classes I try as a first exercise to get students to do this exercise: look at this picture and describe what you see, what it says to you. For example "The orange short-haired tabby cat chased the red and white striped rubber ball down the curved black wrought-iron railed staircase past the terra cotta pots with agave and yellow-and-red canna flowers, with the vine covered stucco wall on the other side, to the red brick tiled floor below with the fluffy white rugs on the floor" it takes all that description to build the image that ONE picture can show - that is the job of the photographer - to tell the story with one image
Do that with your picture - what story are you trying to tell? Look at both images and try the same exercise
Photographers do not take pictures by "rules". they take pictures on what they see, the beauty, the horror, the glory, the fear, the joy; the vibrancy (or life) or the sorrow, emptiness, death of these buildings as you seem to have done
Let the critics come up with remarks like some fanciful rules; just take pictures of what appeals to you