Talk:Galleria

What American is not going to call it a Zamboni ...

... even from the famous scene in Rocky.

"An ice resurfacer is often referred to by its genericized trademark, a "Zamboni"."

I was going to change "ice resurfacer" to the very much more common "Zamboni", but it seem the proper thing to do is confirm Trivia that Valve required the voice lines to be redone to avoid Trademark conflict.

M I K A D O 282 ❄❄❄❄❄❄ ❄❄ ❄❄ (contact)(Help Wanted!) 20:39, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

I've never heard anyone use Zamboni before, I think it should stay as ice resurfacer. Based on the topic name it also seems to be a US-only thing, which we should avoid.
| s | GrampaSwood (talk) (contribs) 20:45, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

Gallery & posters

I think we should remove some of the posters currently in the Gallery, most of them aren't really notable for anything Trivia-related and it just seems like a bit of a texture dump at the moment. The Gallery is probably takes over 50% of the page at this point.
| s | GrampaSwood (talk) (contribs) 13:35, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Maybe remove all that locate out of the playable area and also don't have a reference? Profiteer（奸商）the tryhard (talk) 13:39, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

I say we keep the movie posters with clear real-life equivalents, which are already on display in the gallery, and anything else deemed necessary as referential material (I see we've already made mention of the Eric Smith door elsewhere, for example), but we don't need most of the mall signs or the computer readout texture, and things like that to be displayed on this article in particular, if you ask me. We can move the signs to something like the Companies article, as secondary images for the companies in question. — 06:02, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, the movie posters are fine, it's mostly the non-movie posters and company signs.
| s | GrampaSwood (talk) (contribs) 12:53, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

There's value in the company signs, I just don't think it all has to be shown here. I maintain that we should move them to the Companies article, especially the ones for new businesses featured only in the mall, like Barney's Book Shop, and Crummy's Burgers & Malts; those are new businesses in officially-accepted media now, they should have a column on the companies page, and we can use the signs for existing businesses, like Conquistador Fried Giblets, as alternate logos. — 04:08, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

It was a lot of images, yes, but not necessarily a texture dump, as we can all see most make confirmed tributes or historical references. There just hasn't been the stolen time for me to deal with all of them yet.

• We also see that within the texture files that Profiteer recovered that a number of images are much higher quality than viewable in game; so, it conforms to our usefulness charter to provide users access to the better forms in some way.
• I had already intended to move a select few to the right side of Trivia to reduce the gallery size a little, but that location would be a better context for certain images.
• Furthermore, thanks to Profiteer's effort, they are all available for use (maybe some uses that present editors have not seen yet) so I can link them where they can be used.

What is to be done? Thoughts to broader solutions should be considered, because large numbers of quality and notable images are not a transient thing. We should expect quantities high quality art textures, tributes and references. I think we can accommodate this movement. I have some suggestions:

1. Generously download art, posters, and signs from Community and new Valve maps, companies or not. If these can have a place in this wiki, a Community map's quality art can have a place closely associated with the map's page.
2. Naturally, that map's image category is a simple enough and well-worn way to collect the images.
3. When there are several signs in the category that can't fit into the Gallery then a hatnote can be added to the direct readers to the image category; e.g.,
   For additional images see Category:Galleria images
4. Following the Community map strategies example, an additional subpage could be made for large galleries, so that the large number of images could be curated (sorted and captioned) without cluttering the main article; e.g.,
   For additional images see Galleria/Images

@ThatHatGuy': I have certain agreement with not adding Community map company signs to Companies; same with not adding Community map signs to Signs. Regardless of any question of Canonicity, with 3-4 events a year each adding 3-7 Community maps each adding 10-30 worthy images, List of Companies and List of Signs will explode. I say keep the Community map images close to the Community Map pages where they clearly belong at a minimum (according to the above suggestions,).

M I K A D O 282 ❄❄❄❄❄❄ ❄❄ ❄❄ (contact)(Help Wanted!) 04:30, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

I don't see a reason to feature non-notable posters or company signs at all, not here, not on a subpage, not anywhere. If people want a specific sign, they can just open up the map file themselves and look for it. Just like we don't host all weapon sounds and textures on Weapon pages, posters/company signs should only be here if they are notable in any way (e.g. humorous, Trivia-related, etc.).
| s | GrampaSwood (talk) (contribs) 13:21, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

One: In this specific thread's topic, no argument has been made by me in this thread that non-notable images from Gallery be hosted, because in my opinion, the ones uploaded so far are notable to the map (e.g. humorous, Trivia-related, etc.). But I can agree that in the broader scope I have less concern about less-notable images being loaded to map image categories. "I'd push for more [images in the category] rather than less." ( I would never credit deletion of "unused images" towards a Wikicap vote. )

Two: I understand your respected opinion, but not everyone has the same threshold for level of notability, which is partly why, I think, extractions from the Community maps can be generous, while deletions of even unused images from the wiki should follow our policy of discussion on non-notability. Images of reasonable quality, even if unused on any wiki page, can still be useful in the categories, as I often make use of the categories in article and came research. I can learn things from the game from images someone thought to include, even if it is not used on any page at the moment.

A case of this is Elliphany Electric Trains vs "Latte" ... Bonk Nickeltoon's pet cat (If someone could link the discussion of references to developer family members, please.) Even if the rule is that family relations is no basis for notability, I don't mean to dismiss the pet art, but the Elliphany image as a worthy art contribution to the wiki, if not the game, that feels in place with the art and background of the game.

M I K A D O 282 ❄❄❄❄❄❄ ❄❄ ❄❄ (contact)(Help Wanted!) 17:10, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘Deletion policy dictates that unused images should be deleted, I don't see much notability in company signs when you can load up the map very easily yourself and see them, especially because they are very prominent on this map. Notability for posters/company signs means it has some kind of interesting thing about it, such as a humorous poster (see the asbestos poster and teleporter poster) or a Trivia-related one (see the Carmack Computers poster or the Big Bob's poster). I fail to see how any of the business signs are notable, besides looking pretty.
| s | GrampaSwood (talk) (contribs) 17:24, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

In that case, why even have the Companies page at all? We've listed the maps where they appear. You can load the map up very easily yourself and see them. I fail to see how any of the business signs are notable, besides looking pretty. Not all of them on there are from Valve maps, either. — 08:18, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

"Deletion policy dictates that unused images should be deleted"

In fact, the deletion policy does not dictate that, the Deletion policy states that unused images "may" be deleted, not should nor shall nor must. Yes, technically, the policy permits one person to nominate for deletion, but if Wikipedia's deletion policy is invoked, then is not Wikipedia's deletion discussion policy also invoked?

In said discussion, others are permitted to express desire to Keep (not vote, It's Not a Democracy.).

M I K A D O 282 ⊙⊙⊙⊙⊙⊙ ⊙⊙ ⊙⊙ (contact)(Help Wanted!) 05:58, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

To the point of deleting images that can't fit on the page:  Keep in category at least.

In short,

I would strongly support hosting reasonable extracted images of Valve's IP on Valve's wiki, even if they are not directly used on any page, especially when the main reason for that is too many good images. Often when I am editing, I would much rather have images open in a browser than trying to view them all in game. The extracted images in the category were very helpful for getting confirmations, for discussing layout, and then discussing inclusion or exclusion.

In long:

"I fail to see how any of the [other?] business signs are notable,"

In the other businesses not yet covered by their reference, I still recognize references, and I do appreciate allowing them to stay in the convenience of the map's category, because for me, confirmation takes a while. At the very least moving them to my Sandbox would be a minimal courtesy to Profiteer's time.

There are points favor hosting Valve-sourced Valve IP as well as Community-sourced Valve IP:

• Some have notable Valve-sanctioned features not visible in game. (yes, not true of all of them)
• Some look much better viewed in a browser than in many player's games. (yes, not true of all of them)
• Some users sometimes just want to look at the signs without the additional time of going into the game, which frankly is a suboptimal means of viewing, otherwise file extraction would not be preferred to screen captures.
• Some editors, when researching, would prefer to view in a browser; rather than try to remember what map or where on the map an image is, and side by side is not very conveniently accomplished in game. Note: I was recently told emphatically that there was no "Ball Bearings...etc." sign on Galleria.

"Break all rules" does not mean there are no rules, it means do not let any inflexibly over any rule prevent any one piece of good content. Deletion nominations can result in Keep. Here, we have a case, IMO. Good images for a map should not be deleted (or not uploaded in the first place) just because a map has too many good images to fit in, or we haven't otherwise figured out how to fit them (a subpage for instance). Moreover, good images in a category are still being used even if not linked to any page, at least I use them a lot.

M I K A D O 282 ⊙⊙⊙⊙⊙⊙ ⊙⊙ ⊙⊙ (contact)(Help Wanted!) 05:58, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

"In that case, why even have the Companies page at all?" <- I believe that the Companies page itself has value, as it might be interesting to see what fronts RED/BLU have for their war. Although I'm not personally super interested, I can see value in listing them. The issue for me lies more with the fact that this page was about 40/60 content/Trivia and gallery.

For the past 5 or so years that I've been editing here on the Wiki, unused files have always been deleted no issue. The policy does indeed state "may", but it also states that low effort pages or pages that break the Wiki's policies "may" be deleted. I'm sure we can all agree that if a page breaks policies (such as documenting leaked content) there is no question that the page "may" be deleted but that it should be deleted. If you want to change this policy then I'd say open a discussion about it.

If you'd like to have the images open in a browser, you can simply download the images from the files yourself if you want. I also don't think that "someone put effort into this" is a good reason to keep them around. I'm not convinced by any of the points listed, I get that viewing them in-game might be a hassle but a large part of this page consisted solely of Trivia and the gallery. Though that's not forbidden by any style guide as far as I know, having more poster/business images than actual images of the map clearly indicates a low quality stub article to me. It seems more like a personal preference of "I prefer to have the signs/posters on the Wiki so I can use them" instead of "These signs have something noteworthy on them that should be on the page".

If you can't think of a small piece of Trivia to attach to a Community-made company sign/poster (that isn't "this sign is a reference to an existing company") then it probably shouldn't be on here. For example, the Teleporter poster saying "credit to team" is a Heavy voice line when teleporting, or the Carmack Computers being a reference to John Carmack.
| s | GrampaSwood (talk) (contribs) 13:40, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

So the Companies page is notable in and of itself, because it shows that companies exist, it's interesting to look at them -- but we can't move these specific signs for newly featured businesses to the Companies page, because they just exist as companies, and are therefore pointless to show off literally anywhere? Despite the fact that several companies featured on that article have images used exclusively there?

This is exactly what I was talking about. It's like navigating a maze sometimes, to even get half of an understanding of what you want out of this. It's not as though it wouldn't solve your issue with this page, either, if we just were to move them there, and out of this page. But it's clear that I don't know what I'm talking about, how can I? So I'm just going to leave whatever happens up to the rest of you. — 14:22, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

I haven't talked about adding them to the List of companies page at all, I would be fine with that given that it's made clear they're community-made (perhaps through italics on their name). I even suggested having two separate lists there (one for Community and one for Valve). What I am talking about is not flooding this map page with every sign and poster found on the map if they aren't notable, as it made a majority of the page just signs and posters.

I didn't make the rule about adding Community signs/posters only to their specific map pages, but I do think they fit better there if they have some kind of interesting thing about it. I don't think we should list each and every arrow sign on the map pages too. Given how some maps can provide a lot of unique signs and posters, it may clutter up the "List of" page with posters that are only used once (furthermore, I think that non-notable posters should be removed from List of posters. Such as the many "danger" signs or whatever this is supposed to be).
| s | GrampaSwood (talk) (contribs) 14:43, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

"I haven't talked about adding them to the List of companies page at all," --> "I don't see a reason to feature non-notable posters or company signs at all, not here, not on a subpage, not anywhere." Not anywhere.

That's pretty strong wording for "what I meant was, it'd be fine to feature them there, if we said they were community made signs." When again, a large number of the signs featured on the Companies page already are exclusively used there, and nowhere else. Would you call the Bayou Shipping logo a notable sign? Probably not. But it's there -- and it deserves to be there, because "it's interesting to see what fronts RED and BLU have." — 14:52, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

When the entire discussion is purely about the inclusion of the posters/signs in this page's gallery, I assumed it was obvious that when I said "anywhere" I meant that it includes any other way you would want to feature them on this page. I do think the Shipping Logo is notable enough to be on a page dedicated to companies (at the very least because it's the logo for the company, the page is largely about said companies so it only makes sense to include it), but if that was purely used on a map like Sharkbay then I would say it shouldn't be featured on that map's gallery.
| s | GrampaSwood (talk) (contribs) 15:09, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘To wrap it up (maybe), even if there are disagreements, they are relatively small disagreements that might be better worked out elsewhere, "for another day":

• One-time extraction of content into a common area for every TF user's use versus every user extracting these themselves.
• The difference between notable and non-notable in this specific thread is really down to a handful of signs where individual staff have differing interests and experiences ("Gone Fishing" is definitely a 1968 Kansas-specific experience; I personally met the performer at least 3-4 times, swell guy, great Kansan.)
• How to fairly treat a large volume of notable new content from certain new maps where the large volume of notable new content was the specific goal of the developers AND the users openly expressing that they are looking to this wiki for coverage?
• Clarifications between "Official", "Community Official", "Custom", and the Completely tfwiki-Crafted "Canon".

But these are good problems to have, largely coming from having tens of new quality maps added each year with hundreds of entertaining and artistic new signs.

Anyway, these questions should not be fully decided here and now, but maybe on Team Fortress Wiki:Discussion, someday.

M I K A D O 282 ⊙⊙⊙⊙⊙⊙ ⊙⊙ ⊙⊙ (contact)(Help Wanted!) 02:04, 7 January 2024 (UTC)