Talk:List of Thomas & Friends railway engines

Standards for this article

As a part of the work done by WikiProject Thomas, some standards for this article have been established. These are to ensure that this article, WikiProject Thomas articles, and Wikipedia as a whole, are of high quality and maintain their integrity. The development of these standards can be viewed at both WikiProject Thomas Talk, and this page's Archive 1.

These standards include the following:

Character inclusion/exclusion

The basis for characters being included in this article, is dependent upon the following:

• The character must be a railway engine from the TV Series Thomas the Tank Engine and Friends (AKA Thomas and Friends). This clearly rules out any characters which have only appeared in The Railway Series or films.
• The character must be able to be considered a part of the "regular fleet" of engines in the series. If not featured in recent seasons, the character must be able to feasibly return. If the character cannot be seen as a "regular" (eg. only had one appearance), then the correct article for the character is Minor characters from Thomas the Tank Engine and Friends.
• This page is to be the only reference page (from a TV Series perspective) for all engines, except the following major characters:

• Thomas
• Edward
• Henry
• Gordon
• James
• Percy
• Toby
• Duck
• Donald and Douglas
• Emily

As such, separate articles should not be created for any engines other than those above.

Naming conventions

Some engines have, throughout history, have had "extended names", such as "Thomas the Tank Engine". There are only eight "extended names" which are considered appropriate, based on their consistent use throughout earlier seasons of the TV Series, as well as their origins in The Railway Series books. These are:

• Thomas the Tank Engine
• Edward the Blue Engine
• Henry the Green Engine
• Gordon the Big Engine
• James the Red Engine
• Percy the Small Engine
• Toby the Tram Engine
• Duck the Great Western Engine

Any other engines being given descriptive names (eg. "Murdoch the Mighty Engine") does not have any consistent, official basis. Please consider that using an adjective to describe an engine does not therefore make it an official naming convention.

   I heard that it was Gordon the Express Engine, not Big Engine.

   - Please re-read the section above. Gonzerelli, 13 Feb 2007.

Character list

The use of the character list at the head of this article bypasses the need for a Table Of Contents, and conveniently displays information, while anchor-linking within this article to each character's section. It is listed in order of first appearance within the series, which may not necessarily be the same order as they are listed within the article proper. This is intentional, as "Engines 1-11" can be placed in numerical order in the article, though Gordon (#4) appeared in the Series before Edward or Henry (#2 & #3).

Numbers

This has been the subject of some heated discussion in the past. Despite some engines (particularly diesel engines) carrying numbers (often similar as their prototypes upon which they were based), this often has no bearing on actual running of the railways in the Series. As such, it has been declared that ONLY the following engines' numbers will be specified in the Character List:

• 1-11 Standard Gauge (Thomas, Edward, Henry, Gordon, James, Percy, Toby, Duck, Donald, Douglas, Oliver)
• 1-7 Narrow Gauge (Skarloey, Rheneas, Sir Handel, Peter Sam, Rusty, Duncan, Fearless Freddie)
• 27 (Harvey - "the number 27, including the Narrow Gauge engines and excluding Diesel, accurately reflects him being the 27th addition to the fleet of engines working on Sodor. [Quoted direct from article])

Images

By the very nature of this article, one picture per section depicting each character is acceptable, and indeed enhances this article greatly. However, as we may only use one image per character, the choice of image is incredibly important. The images should be clear, and where possible show as much of the engine as possible - ideally their face, funnel, wheels, body, and tender (if applicable). As these images have been carefully selected over time, it is considered harmful to change these images without discussion, or without the "new" image being obviously more appropriate.

Miscellaneous

• Use of terminology:- "Engine" or "engines" is the correct terminology to use for this artcle, rather than "locomotive" or "train".
• As this TV Series is a British series, British spelling and grammar should be used, rather than American spelling or grammar.
• The section titles should not be changed, as changing them would mess with anchored links from dozens of other articles.
• As with all other articles, superfluous comments which add nothing to the article are inappropriate, and should be removed.

Please, feel free to discuss

While the above standards may seem restrictive and stifling, it has been necessary to reach a set of common standards after over a year of editing this page (to my knowledge). However, if you disagree with any of these standards, or wish to discuss them, then please feel free to do so. We always welcome valuable input from other users.

On behalf of WikiProject Thomas,

Gonzerelli 17:33, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Heading levels

I noticed that the heading levels in this article depart from the usual Wikipedia standard of starting at level 2 (i.e. ==) and instead start at level 1 (i.e. =). Rather than simply fixing it, I thought I'd point it out so as to make certain there wasn't some local consensus, especially since this article, like the rest of the Thomas articles is plagued with unhelpful anonymous edits. Caerwine Caer’s whines 20:10, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Please add Rosie

Dear friends

For all who like Thomas the Tank Engune and his friends, please add photo of Rosie, because my son miss it and asked me where it is, we searched in the history of the article but we could not find it, so please hlep Rosie to join her friends.

Ahmed —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ahmed Alhasanyah (talk • contribs) 08:58, 11 December 2006 (UTC).

If you actually look at the article, you will find Rosie there, at the bottom of the "Standard Gauge Engines" section, complete with picture.

I've also removed the section you added to this talk page which was almost a direct carbon copy of this section.

Gonzerelli 01:04, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Daer Mr/Ms. Gonzerelli Thanks for ur comment, but plz know, that me and my son tell now can not find photo of Rosie, yes there is article about her, but no photo in this article, we well be greetful if u or anybody can add it, and also if u can add more abouth Thomas abd his friends.

With best wishes Ahmed

Ahmed, click this link. It will take you to the part of the article that has a description of Rosie and her picture. Gwernol 18:24, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Ahmed, there is a pic of Rosie, and this isn't needed anymore.--S.C.Ruffeyfan 17:11, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Neville and Dennis

A thought here...at the moment, these two engines are on the 'major' character page. However, since they have only appeared within one season (and then one episode), maybe they should be transferred to the 'minor' characters section. Molly makes numerous cameos, which saves her, but these two don't.

Just a suggestion. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by CBFan (talk • contribs) 16:30, 17 December 2006 (UTC).

At the moment, they've got the benefit of the doubt, as Season 9 is still very recent. Should there be a Season 11, and should they not appear in that season, then yes I would be moving for them to be transferred to Minor Characters. Gonzerelli 05:14, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

thanks

Mr. Gwernol thanks for ur help as also thanks for Mr./Ms. Gonzerelli, and hope if some friends can add the song of Thomas in words and audio.

Ahmed Alhasanyah 20:28, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Superfluous comments

The following superfluous comments have been continually reverted. The reasons for these reverts have been clearly stated in edit summaries, however the unregistered user(s) making these edits are clearly not reading these reasons. While I doubt they will read the Talk page, I am hoping they will, and in any case this is to make things clearer.

• Duncan is painted bright orange. "Bright yellow-orange" is not an appropriate statement - the "yellow-" part adds nothing to the sentence, and in fact makes the whole section look indecisive and somewhat childish.

• Harvey - there have been two issues lately. Firstly is the issue of "gold stripes" - Harvet does NOT have gold stripes (at very least not in the context in which other engines, such as Henry, have stripes). There is gold lettering, gold numerals, gold in the machinery of his crane arm and some gold outlining key areas of the body of the engine. But stripes, no. The current statement of "dull red, with some gold" is correct.

The second point is the mention of a mechanical claw, apparently seen since Season 9. This statement contains information which *could* be useful, but I cannot see how it can be included here without being superfluous. Indeed, nothing I have reverted to this effect has been worthy of keeping.

Full reasons for the deletion of superfluous comments as a whole can be found at WP:THOMAS/FAQ.

Gonzerelli 13:24, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Helpful or unnecessary?

Whilst on the subject of what is considered superfluous and what isn't... Why has this been reverted, whereas in the next paragraph, the following sentence has been left in:

In The Railway Series, he was also given a red coat of paint, however in the TV Series he retained his green colour.

?

Surely if any mention of differences between the two series is disallowed/unnecessary, then this latter sentence should go too?

Quackdave 13:17, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

You do have a valid point. There is an apparent inconsistency here. As far as possible, WP:THOMAS members have agreed that the articles on the TV Series and Railway Series (books) characters will keep to the one media. In most cases this has been achieved, although the engines of the Skarloey Railway have not been fully processed yet.

The answer here is twofold. Firstly, the difference in engine colour between the book and TV character is very significant in terms of identification, so I think it IS valid to include it here. Secondly, the difference of who gave the special funnel is actually quite trivial. Although there is a definite factual difference (the Thin Controller being the donor in the books), in reality it makes no difference who gave the special funnel, so the real answer is to re-write the sentence to remove the reference requiring clarification.

EdJogg 14:41, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

I believe this is helpful for the article: "Murdoch... is painted orange with gold stripes. Murdoch clearly has gold stripes on his boiler, and I don't know why my statement was deleted. --BigThomasFan 01:35, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Having investigated further, you are right, it would be consistent for Murdoch's section to include the colour of his 'stripes', in the same way that all the other tender engines are described. However, are you sure they are gold? (Two recent edits, also reverted, described them as red and green, which would seem sensible for an orange engine).

Having just watched Peace and Quiet on YouTube, he clearly has green and red lining...

EdJogg 22:08, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Prototypes

why are the prototypes on the list? isn't this superfluous, since most engines are based on the railway series characters rather than the original prototypes? and for those who aren't, the prototypes are already mentioned in their sections anyway.

it looks like a step backwards to me.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 144.138.23.240 (talk • contribs) 13:27 - 01 May 2007.

This table started off as a TableOfContents substitute, but with the running number and 'first appearance' details added. The inclusion of this extra information means that the table is now rather more than just a TOC. So, if this 'extra information' is allowed to remain (and I see no reason why it shouldn't) there is equally no reason why the acres of whitespace to the right shouldn't be utilised for something worthwhile.

I would agree that the prototype information is duplication, however it is being presented in summary form, and hence such duplication is probably acceptable. As for the fact that the Railway Series -based characters were based on the Railway Series characters, which were themselves based on real prototypes, it makes sense to include appropriate prototype information for ALL engines, whatever their ancestry, to be consistent. Readers looking for prototype information would probably like to find it all in one place (this does not mean it should be stripped-out from the existing articles).

What IS needed is some serious copy-editing and linking, as the existing text is not up to standard at present.

EdJogg 14:43, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Diesel: black or brown?

It's a minor point, but I keep getting reverted on this so I thought I'd bring it here. Is Devious Diesel colored black or dark brown? From what I see, he is a very dark brown, but he is not black. Donald and Douglas are black, but Diesel is not the same color. The picture given doesn't make it so obvious, but I remember especially when watching Diesel's first appearance that there is little room for doubt that he's actually dark brown. --Hnsampat 14:34, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for taking the trouble to discuss this here. My apologies if your (good-faith) edits have been lost in passing. This and the other 'Thomas' character articles attract a high level of unencyclopaedic content, usually from anon editors: fan fiction, superfluous or suspicious detail (see WP:THOMAS/FAQ), changes from British to American English (it is a British series), speculation about future episodes, etc. At present, the other Wikipedians who agreed on the level of acceptable content (ie acceptable for Wikipedia) seem to be taking an extended Wikibreak, and I am the only project member keeping an eye on the pages to maintain the standard of content. As such, it is often necessary to revert a whole raft of unwanted edits in one go. Occasionally a 'good' edit goes with them, although I try to re-instate any that appear to be worthwhile.</rant>

Now, to Diesel...

In the books, Diesel is undoubtedly black. The prototype on British Rail was painted black, initially, and later green, blue, and various modern TOC colours, but never brown. The Ertl model is black, and I suspect the other models are too. So I am surprised to find that you consider him painted dark brown.

Agreed, 'black' Coca Cola is actually deep red, when held up to the light, and my black cat is actually a very dark brown, when he sprawls out in the sun, but I don't think the same applies to Diesel.

If you can provide a screenshot which shows him to be brown, and there is concensus here to change, then I am willing to accept that this is yet another case where Britt Allcroft & Co got the colour wrong!!

EdJogg 11:34, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

I can actually do better than a screenshot. On YouTube, I found the video of Diesel's first appearance ("Pop Goes the Diesel"). As you watch, starting at 0:45, you'll see how Diesel is a very dark brown, but not black. It might be worth noting in the article that he's black in the books, though. --Hnsampat 23:23, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

He does look a bit chocolatey, but I always took him to be black too! I can't abide that narration - sorry! –MDCollins (talk) 23:15, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

I think you'll find that's oily black! Also, check out the lyrics to Pop Goes the Weasel#In Fiction -- that says black too. Nevertheless, I think its simplest if the article sticks with plain 'black'. EdJogg 01:17, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes as said before Diesel is black for in the song "Pop Goes the Diesel" it says "In and out he creeps about, like a big BLACK weasel" Diesel 10 04:32, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Update images of NG locos?

Should or should we not update the pictures of the earlier Narrow Gauge engines? I'm sure everyone can see a great difference from the old models and the new ones. Diesel 10 04:27, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

If there are differences between old and new models, these should both be shown, although the correct place for this is on the engine's individual page, not this page.

However, there is not much point doing it here, as the new images will be deleted fairly quickly. All 'fair-use' images (which includes all screenshots) must be provided with an adequate 'Fair Use Rationale' to explain why its use should be permitted in Wikipedia. It is unlikely that an adequate FUR can be provided for any 'Thomas' screenshot, and hence it will not be long before the 'Thomas' articles are clear of screenshot images. (Unless someone comes up with a FUR that is acceptable, and I don't have the time to try.)

Alternatively, the current format of pages has been 'rescued' to TrainSpotting World where restrictions are more lenient. There is still a requirement to acknowledge copyrighted/fair-use images and provide Fair-Use Rationales, but screenshots are permitted.

'Before and after' pictures would be a good idea...

EdJogg 12:11, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

FUR for screenshots

I have created a FUR for the pics. Before I use it I want to know what the rest of you think.

This image is of Skarloey from the TV series Thomas and Friends. This picture is to help inhance the artical in which it has been placed. Although it is used for our informal purposes is can be as an advertisement for advertising the TV show from which it is from. This is why the the owners (HIT Entertainment) would probley not wish for it to be removed. It helps us and at the same time helps them. Diesel 10 12:42, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for taking this on board, it needs someone that has rather more time than I do at present.

I found a useful FUR yesterday, which might be adapted for the 'Thomas' screenshots: see Image:Miss Sedusa.JPG. While I cannot be certain that the FUR for that image is enough to satisfy WP requirements, it is certainly a good start, and should be enough to stop the images from being speedy deleted.

In addition to the four lines from that image FUR, you could mention that the image is being used to aid identification of the character.

Note that for each image you will also need to specify who owns the copyright (ie HIT Entertainment), and where the image was obtained from ('the source').

Please post your (new) suggestion here so that I can check it before you apply it to the images. There are several typing/grammar issues with the paragraph you wrote above, and you would want to avoid copying these onto 100+ images!

EdJogg 13:24, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

This image is of Skarloey from the TV series "Thomas and Friends". This picture is to enhance the artical it's from as well as help describe the character in question. This image is copyrighted to HIT Entertainment and is sourced from the Thomas and Friends episode "The Grand Openning". This image is use for our informational purposes but may also be considered as advertising for the TV series so it helps us and the owners which is why I'm sure they would not wish to remove the images. It helps us and them.

How's that? Diesel 10 06:27, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

I was thinking more along the lines of this:

==Summary==

This image is of the Thomas & Friends character: Skarloey.

It is believed that its use in Railway engines (Thomas the Tank Engine and Friends) counts as 'Fair Use' for the reasons stated below.

• Copyright owner: HIT Entertainment plc
• Source: Thomas & Friends, Season 7, Episode 21: "The Grand Opening"
• Screen capture by: <name>or<URL>

===Fair use rationale===

1. The image is of low resolution
2. The image does not limit the copyright owners' rights to distribute the source product in any way.
3. For an article about an animated television series, images are very important for identifying individual characters and add significantly to the article.
4. The image is only being used for informational purposes.

Sorry for not getting back to you sooner (family complications).

As I mentioned earlier, adding this to the images may not be enough in the long-term, but it should certainly prevent immediate deletions due to lack of FUR.

Incidentally, don't mention the 'advertising' side of things. YOU know that it's in HIT's interest for us to use the image, and I know that too, but the legal position is clear, and HIT could complain about these images being present on WP if they so chose.

EdJogg 12:45, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

So it's agreed? We use that FUR? Until we create a better one? Diesel 10 00:21, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Please do. Until someone complains, we should be able to use this one to stop any more images being deleted. (You'll notice that a number were bot-deleted overnight.)

EdJogg 09:13, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

I've started adding the FURS and have done upto Arry and Bert and I will do some more tomorrow. I don't know what episode Percy and Toby are from by the way. Diesel 10 08:45, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

The FUR didn't work! The Gordon image was deleted and I added the FUR to it!

Daisy

It is my opinion that Daisy should be transfered to the Minor Characters page. This is because she has only been featured in 3 episodes and was in Calling All Engines. This is the same with George the Steamroller but he is in the Minor Characters section. Diesel 10 06:44, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

There are other characters who have appeared in only a few episodes too, although it is not always clear from the text. 'Neville' for example, only appeared in one episode.

It is debatable whether 'cameos' should count as appearances, in which case several more should be moved. (New characters should be considered minor until it is established how many episodes they feature in...)

What should the threshold be? One appearance, two, three?

There is a bigger problem on the 'vehicles' page where major characters such as Bertie are mixed with minor or insignificant characters.

Perhaps you could list your proposed changes at WP:THOMAS talk page for wider discussion?

EdJogg 12:15, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Shouts

I feel the article shouts due to uncalled-for using exclamations and statements that don't belong in encyclopedias. Anyone care to edit them away? 22:04, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Suggest splitting off the narrow guage/Skarloey Railway engiines

The article is getting a bit long, plus the Skarloey Railway uses its own numbering sequence starting at 1 with Skarloey, so an article separating out the narrow gauge engines of the Skarloey Railway would also help to deconfuse the table. Caerwine Caer’s whines 19:21, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Just recently I proposed re-writing the pages for NG engines to meet the standards of Thomas the Tank Engine, Gordon the Big Engine and pages of the likes.

I think if we create Narrow gauge characters (Thomas the Tank Engine and Friends), we can bring the profiles for Bertram, Proteus and other minor ones - to settle the dispute of minor characters. Then we can bring the rest of the minor characters to the other pages, and be rid of Minor characters from Thomas the Tank Engine and Friends. We should carry this over to the WP:Thomas talk page for further discussion.

--Rusty5 20:14, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes, yes as it was said on the WP:THOMAS page I'm willing to do the move. And of cause I agree. Diesel 10 07:40, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Whiff picture

Was Image:Whifff1.png removed from the Whiff section of the because it was a picture of the toy instead of a screenshot, or because it got taken down in the innumerable IP edits this article is plagued by? Caerwine Caer’s whines 04:52, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

It really just keeps appearing and re-appearing, but I first removed it because it's just a picture of the model. I'd rather wait for an actual screenshot from the show. Plus remember that the picture was smuggled to us from someone with ties to HiT... Rusty5 12:20, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

No problem, tho I have no idea what HiT is. I'm not a Soderphile, but got attracted to helping keep watch over this page because of all the IP vandalism it receives. Caerwine Caer’s whines 18:03, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

HiT is the company that owns Thomas. So if they found out that we had that picture before the season was even released, we'd have a serious issue on the hands of the kind user who gave us the pic. Anything else you need to know about the issues behind Thomas and these pages you can ask me about. Rusty5 19:02, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

As I have been watching over this page and I have noticed another image posted by the same user who took the picture of Whiff. He name is Soursour. He posted the Sir Handel picture, I went to investigate further and found that he claims that he is "the copyright holder" of the picture. A first I though that's rubbish but then I saw the picture of Whiff posted by him and I'm sure that is the actual model so it think he is someone in HIT, probably of high status. He has also posted the picture of Jeremy on the Non-Rail Characters page. Diesel 10 08:27, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't think so. The image was leaked to TV.com months ago; lots of people have been posting it on YouTube and such. Starkiller 22:25, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Whiff

"Whiff is a dark green 2-2-4 rubbish-collecting tank engine with dark green wheels and glasses, the first engine character in the TV series to do so."

This bit doesn't seem to read correctly, it is supposed to mean that it is the first engine to wear glasses? The first engine to have dark green wheels + glasses? Cmiag 09:08, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

I think it's supposed to mean he is the first engine to have glasses ;). Diesel 10 08:41, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Pics

Why were the pics deleted? S.C.Ruffeyfan16:40, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

The fair use policy for copyrighted pictures, which screen shots invariably are, call for minimal use, so for those engines which have articles of their own, having an image appear both here and in the other article would to some be more than minimal usage. That explains some, but not all of the effort to purge images from this article. Some of the others have gone by the wayside because source information for the pictures weren't provided or a fair use rationale wasn't given, which caused the picture to be deleted not just from the article, but the entire Wiki. For very good reason, the powers that be are very careful about copyrighted material here. Caerwine Caer’s whines 18:08, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Spam!

There have been loads and loads of spam on this page!! There have even been hoax info about season 13!! That has now got the page fully protected!!

I even reverted that f*cking spam!

I will show you this pice of spam! SteveRamone thought the hoax characters on this pice of spam where existing characters for season 13 in 2009!!!!!!!!!

Here are the hoax characters in the pice of spam Steve Ramone thought are valid:

Fat controller's engines

(hoax info engines)

• Benjamin-is a green diesel who works on the main line taking passangers on long jorneys or hauling freight. He speaks in an american accent and is based on a British Rail Class 31.

He was teased by BoCo once!

• Mandy-is a green 0-6-0 snazzy tender engine who's favorate thing is takeing passangers on long jorneys but she hates pulling freight, She thinks that will spoil her beaty. She is panted dark green with gold stripes. (She is the second beautiful engine on sodor the first (emily) and she is sodor's 4th female steam engine (Others Rosie,Molly and Emily) and she is the 5th to have shiney buffers). Her closest friends are Emily,Molly and Rosie. She speaks in a scottish accent and is based on a SECR C Class. She was teased by Donald and Douglas twice. Donald and Douglas first teased Mandy for her high pitch wistle by saying its annoying (Mandy's wistle sounds just like Emily's wistle when she was introduced in Season 7) then Donald and Douglas teased her from not being from scotland but Mandy's driver said that Mandy was from scotland (the east highlands) and so was her driver and fireman so the Fat controller Scolded the twins and they were never cheeky to Mandy again.

Donald and Douglas teased her about her wistle in episode (hoax episode) The twins tease Mandy! and they Teased her for not being from scotland in episode (hoax episode) Are you scottish Mandy?

• Stephen-is a Big maroon 4-6-2 express engine. He was saved from scrap by Benjamin the deisel engine. He workes now on the Fat controller's railway where he has been resored to the LMS Livery. He speaks in an welsh accent and is based on a LMS Princess Coronation Class. He is the 6th engine to have shiny buffers and aso the first engine to have shiney oval shaped buffers and he is the 2nd engine to have smoke deflectors. He is not to be confused by the Aroplane stephen.

Vick Vick is a black tender engine with the same body as Neville. In Vick comes to the Island, Vick is brought into the yard by BoCo and Mavis. Thomas knows that Vick is a really kind engine and Vick wants to work with him.

Vick is based on a Bulleid "Q1" Engine. —Preceding unsigned comment added by CBFan (talk • contribs) 10:50, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Visiting engines

(hoax info engines)

• Duke of Gloucester-is a 4-6-2 visiting engie to the island of sodor. He helped the engines on the main line until he wnt to the other part of the island that no engines saw him. His cachprase is "You can never get away from his grace!". He is based on a BR Standard Class 8.

Rheneasfan2 (talk) 14:32, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Regarding my reversion

These changes didn't appear to be vandalism, which is why I reverted the edit. The changes appeared to be well-informed albeit unsourced. If it's a joke, it's quite a well-conceived one given that it's written in a sensible way {except for the poor English} with info that doesn't seem out of place. If it had been obvious vandalism, I wouldn't have reverted it. Maybe I'm naive, but I did it in good faith. SteveRamone (talk) 17:36, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Which loco is Flora?

I dont know what tram engine is Flora. A J70?, or what? 86.137.115.60 (talk) 08:10, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Cameos

Just to let you all know, cameos are NOT notable appearances. I will begin removing information about cameos, and re-wording some sections, as most are writen quite poorly. _Skeletal SLJCOAAATR ^{Soul teh Hedgie} 17:34, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Oh, so you mean that your LIES are better than MY truth? Well then, YOU don't belong on Wikipedia, because constant lie telling when it's clearly obviously not the case would make you a vandal. I suggest you either re-think or retreat. CBFan (talk) 20:47, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Um, yeah. How about freaking rewording it dude? Making the article better isn't vandalising, dude. =.= It's not weather it's true, or not. It's weather it's notable, or not. Cameos, simply aren't notable. They're fine for a TTTE Wikia, not Wikipedia. _Skeletal SLJCOAAATR ^{Soul teh Hedgie} 21:08, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

OK, that makes no sense. First of all, it's clearly "whether". Second of all, you're refusing to accept that Stepney cameos in Season 12, yet you're quite happy to accept his cameos in Seasons 6 and 7. That clearly makes no sense. Thirdly, Thomas Wikias suck. Here at least would stand a good chance of there being correct information, if you didn't keep inserting blatant lies. Finally...if you're so clever, why don't YOU do it? CBFan (talk) 21:18, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

1. Whatever. 2. I'm not refusing it. I'll beliee it if you say so. But, it's just not notable. I'll get around to removing info abut other cameos when I get to it. Until then, I'm just keeping more recent things out. Once S12 ends, I'm trying to make alot of changes to these article. But, first, we all need to settle on one thing. _Skeletal SLJCOAAATR ^{Soul teh Hedgie} 21:25, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Don't use the star thing, it just doesn't work. But, once again, you're not listening. What you're doing is clearly biased. You quite happily except Stepney's Season 6 and 7 cameos as relevant, but you're refusing to accept his S12 cameo as such. That is not fair and makes no sense. By simply reverting, you're telling lies. Your main problem is that you're refusing to be consistant.CBFan (talk) 21:28, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm not accepting those either. As I JUST said, I will remove them when I get around to it. _Skeletal SLJCOAAATR ^{Soul teh Hedgie} 21:29, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Removing them "When I get around to it" is NOT good enough, because it results in, as I've said before, blatant lies. CBFan (talk) 21:32, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

No, it's not lies, it's called "Under Construction". And since you're so hasty, I'm doing it now. While I'm at it, what did D&D do in S11? I only remember a cameo in an early episode. _Skeletal SLJCOAAATR ^{Soul teh Hedgie} 21:37, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

You said that Stepney did not appear again after Season 7. That's clearly a lie, seeing as he appeared in S12. And this is something your "cameos don't count" thing can't save you from, because his S6/7 appearances WERE cameos. Also, Donald and Douglas played a vital role in the one episode they appeared in...not only that, but they had speaking roles. Thus, NOT cameos. CBFan (talk) 21:40, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes, and I'm in the middle of fixing that at this moment. Could actually tell me about their role, possibly with proof? Remember, we can't just be like "I saw it, therefore, it's fact". We need reliable sources saying so, so that we can say so, and give a proper citation. Right now, readers have to pretty much, just take our word with it. Therefore, to fix that, I'm trying to revamp these article, by removing fancruft, non notable for Wikipedia information, and giving proper citations. (Give me a few days with this article, and hopefully, it'll be in better condition.) _Skeletal SLJCOAAATR ^{Soul teh Hedgie} 21:49, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

(Unindent) Ok. I have to start logging off soon. I'll start the actual procedure after school tomorrow, and wrap it up, best I can on Saturday. _Skeletal SLJCOAAATR ^{Soul teh Hedgie} 21:57, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Also, I'd really appreciate it if you'd help with my work, CBF. Lastly, just curious, what's your opinion on the matter with this article: Thomas, You're the Leader. Thank you. _Skeletal SLJCOAAATR ^{Soul teh Hedgie} 21:58, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

It is appropriate to mention all episode appearances, where there are relatively few (three or four?), and where the character plays a significant role in the plot of the episodes concerned. If a character appears in only one episode, there is no need to say "he has not been seen since". Might be worth a caveat at the top of the page, describing the scope of the article (eg to say that "cameo appearances" are not listed). That will give you better grounds for deleting inadmissable content. EdJogg (talk) 22:21, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Actually, there is no need to mention ALL appearances (cameo-wise). Let's say, Mephiles. He appeared in Sonic Nex-Gen, and Sonic Rivals 2. His role in SR2 was just a cameo, thus, not being notable in Wikipedia, meaning that he can no longer be placed in here, though, it used to be ALL characters, (Long story, I'm currently neutral on it.). Why should cameos be noteworthy for Thomas article, but, not Sonic articles? The cameos, and minor roles suit fine for Wikia's, thus, the reason for their existance (CBF, if they suck so badly, why not try improving them, like I am to SNN?). I agree with your statement about "So, and so hasn't been seen since whenever", Ed. We can say that for major/primary recurring characters (IE: Duck, Oliver, Donald, etc.) But, for characters who only appeared a few times (IE: 1-8), there's no need to. Stating that cameos aren't included at te top of the article just may be very useful. I'll try that during my revamp tomorrow. (Don't worry, it's starting as a sandbox, and once a compromise arises, it'll (Hopefully) become the new this.) _Skeletal SLJCOAAATR ^{Soul teh Hedgie} 22:50, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, if you insist on removing mention of cameo appearances then that should be stated at the top of the page. There are fans who like to read these pages too. But there is a place for Thomas info about cameos and stuff on the web - Thomas and Friends Wiki. And I know that I'm the rookie here-but I consider the Thomas, You're the Leader article to be notable though it does need improvement...ZEM a.k.a. Hankengine (talk) 22:40, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

• 1. Just said that.
• 2. Please state on it's entry for deletion why you think it's notable.

Since you are fairly new, Hank, I, or another fairly knowledgable user would happily teach you when you need help. _Skeletal SLJCOAAATR ^{Soul teh Hedgie} 22:50, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

[Unindent again!] I can understand why fans are interested in cameo appearances, since it suggests that the characters haven't been completely killed-off. On the other hand, it is extremely boring to read! A Thomas wiki is the right place for such detailed info...

For characters, particularly Duck/Donald+Douglas, who have appeared in many seasons and then 'disappeared' it is worth mentioning this fact. (The danger is that fans will then come along and say "but Duck will appear in [future] Season xx", but they'll probably do that anyway...) For other characters it is still appropriate to mention which series they first appeared in, and whether they only appeared in a single story (as many of the non-regular characters do) -- these are still 'defining characteristics'. If they appear sporadically, then we can mention this (as appropriate) rather than being more specific.

Separate thought: would it be a good idea to include a table at the end of the article that cross-references seasons vs appearances, for each character? By 'appearance' I mean simply that within the season the character plays an (active) role in the plot of an episode (which is the threshold we should be using), not the number of episodes in which the character appears. Not proposing to create such a table myself, but thought it worth mentioning in case someone wanted to run with it

[PS - not watching this page at present due recent to high edit count. Will pick-up again after I've cleared my latest watchlist backlog!!]

EdJogg (talk) 12:28, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Sorry I didn't do the work today...I was out all day, and I'm really tired now. I'll try tomorrow. Hopefully, I won't lose internet due to the major storm we're getting... /:

Anyways...I admit that I'm interested in cameos, and minor roles, but, the problem is, they simply aren't notable, and make much better for a Thomas Wikia. If it sucks so much (Which I admit it does...), why not try creating a Task Force to clean it up? My friend did that on the Sonic Wikia, we got a bunch of members, and it's in MUCH better shape after only a months worth of work.

Anyways, (AGAIN), a list of what season they debuted in, I'm not sure. I don't think that it'd be a very good idea, but, maybe we should bring that to the attention of someone muchwiser on tv articles, and how they should look...

If a character was a major recurring character for 3+ seasons (IE: Harold, Terence, Duck, etc.),and suddenly disappeared, I see no harm in mentioning that they haven't been seen since such, and such a season, so long as we can find a reliable source (tv.com, perhaps?) stating so. Anyone could state such a thing without a source. I wouldn't bother mentioning this for characters like, Duke, or Old Slow Coach, since they were only in one season (Exlcuding cameos), albeit being recurring characters for some time. _Skeletal SLJCOAAATR ^{Soul teh Hedgie} 04:03, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Merge proposal (Whiff)

To accompany some damaging edits to this page (almost amounting to vandalism) a user has created a character page Whiff the Collecting Engine. This character has only appeared in two episodes (as far as can be seen) and therefore does not qualify for his own article page (according to the long-established guidelines determined by members of the WP:THOMAS project).

It is suggested that the character page be converted to a redirect, and any meaningful text be incorporated into the entry for Whiff on this page.

EdJogg (talk) 13:08, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes this should be merged, I'm surprised this hasn't already been taken care of. Besides, the page is just a copy from Wikia. ZEM talk to me! 16:17, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Missing character table?

I've been away from this page since mid-August, as the stupidly-high edit count was swamping my watchlist while I caught up a backlog of edits to check. What do I find? Chaos and confusion, and the character list replaced by a standard ToC!!

I think the article has now lost something significant. The list of characters table at the start acted as both contents table and gathered other information together. Without it, the order of characters is completely bizarre (unless you know the page history).

While it would be possible to restore the table of contents 'as-is' at the start of the page, I am quite happy if this is not what other editors want, but I would suggest that we instead re-instate the table at the END of the page -- once more providing a reference point for the order in which the characters were introduced to the TV Series. This leaves a problem with the rest of the page, as the order of entries in the ToC makes no obvious sense. I suggest it should be re-arranged into straight alphabetical order (with the exception of the Steam Team locos and the Visiting Engines), since this will make the characters much easier to find.

(There is also an amount of dross and inaccuracy (eg BoCo vs Boco) which has crept in recently, but this must be addressed separately.)

Thoughts? -- EdJogg (talk) 14:04, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

That was me who removed it. A vandal screwed up a bunch of things in the article a few weeks ago, and I wasn't able to fix it. I removed it. Why? It seemed extremely random, and made no sense at all. If it can be made to be more space conservative (3-5 characters going across per row?), and jst writing their name in their color, as the extra info only took up valuble space, and was very redundant of each characters summary. I'm also in favor of alphabetical order, though intro order is fine as well (listing ain characters first, then, recurring, and lastly guest.) I've aso considered possibly a seperate artice for the visiting characters. When I get some spare time, I'll try cleaning up the article, and providing more sources. I've been meaning to do so for a few weeks, but, something keeps poping up... _Skeletal SLJCOAAATR ^Soulsor 01:13, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Illustration of this article

What would the proper copyright info for images be, if I were to upload some? I would be happy to insert screencaptures into the article that capture what the engines look like. ZEM a.k.a. Hankengine (talk) 23:39, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

The major characters already have images on their articles. Though, I guess images of major recurring characters (Bill & Ben, Mavis, etc.) wouldn't hurt. Be careful not to go over 13 images per article (That's the limit, I believe) When uploading them, just do your best, I'll take a look at the copyrighting to make sure it's correct. I've got some experience with images. _Skeletal SLJCOAAATR ^Soulsor 01:04, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Please don't waste your time uploading and re-adding images to this article until you are absolutely certain that the rules will allow them to remain. All images of Thomas characters will be classed as 'Fair Use', and the restrictions on fair-use images prohibit their inclusion on multi-character pages such as this (I think).

I agree that the article is the poorer for the lack of images, but 'rules is rules' and you are entering a minefield trying to do this. Have a quick look at the WP:THOMAS talk page for an alert I raised concerning the original removal of the images. From memory, that alert contains some useful references to the policies that were in the process of being applied.

This is not a threat, but if you don't follow the fair-use rules to the letter your images will just be deleted, which would have be a waste of your time.

EdJogg (talk) 01:17, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Actually, it should be fine. Use this as an example. It's got a few images, and may gt one, or two more once everything's finished with all the merging about. _Skeletal SLJCOAAATR ^Soulsor 01:33, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

OK, well make sure you follow the Fair Use policies to the letter and you may well get away with it. EdJogg (talk) 09:37, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Ok, well I'll be uploadin' some soon hopefully. ZEM (Hankengine) (talk) 21:32, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

template For2

The use of these templates is incorrectly used because for2 is a hatnote. You are also using them to verbosity. The word famous should not be use because this is a subjective word.174.3.98.236 (talk) 13:47, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Agreed {{for2}} is indeed for use as a hatnote and was used inappropriately here; the replacement {{Main}} is also now being used inappropriately, or at least misleadingly, for reasons discussed at length elsewhere. A correct replacement will be applied in due course (but I have some more important things to do first!)

Just to note that the word 'famous' is used in the original (book) text and is appropriate in its context -- 'notable' (in its Wikipedia sense) would be meaningless in the same context, and not understood by the target audience. No doubt in the 2000's the word 'celebrity' would be used instead. The section needs revisiting, as the term 'famous' is probably in terms of the understanding of the characters rather than the reader. Although your edits in this section are generally good, I'm not sure that "Notable visitors" is correct as a title -- the whole point about the visitors is that they were "famous"!!!

-- EdJogg (talk) 16:15, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Which correct replacement should be applied?

If the word "famous" is used in the literature:

• You need to provide a citation. You must quote this. I can not stress this enough. As you and both have now run into, this has led to confusion.

I am totally fine with you using famous, but it MUST be in quotes if it is refering to the usage in the book or wherever.174.3.98.236 (talk) 16:34, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Since those characters were never referred to by their actual names on the show, "Famous Visitor" is taken from the episode title in which Truro appeared, because they really didn't have enough character to justify separate sections. A while back I tried to get some referencing started in this article, but it's such an extensive list that it takes a lot of time to cite each episode, which is why I never got around to that section.

As far as I know, the only reason hatnotes were used to begin with was because otherwise both articles would link to each other as "Main". To be honest I'm getting tired of keeping these lists organized. The book/TV character lists are so long, some with overlapping details, I don't think I have the energy to keep dealing with syntax and organization here. Starkiller (talk) 17:02, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Oh, I see. This is the best solution. Do not use {{main}}. {{seealso}} may be a good choice. Because each hatnote is just refering referring to a section on another article, we should use ==See also== and then we should just list the article there.174.3.98.236 (talk)

No, using "See also" is DEFINITELY NOT the solution. We can use {{details}}. That does the job perfectly. I just haven't had time to apply it yet.

Mr? 174.3.98.236, do you think you could create an account for yourself please? As an anon editor, your work may be viewed with suspicion, even considered vandalism, yet your edits are clearly applied with thought. (I've just seen the table edit in The Railway Series -- on a quick glance it looks good.) It would be good to work with you rather than against, and Starkiller could do with some help looking after the T&F characters... But a name would help.

EdJogg (talk) 20:17, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Having seen {{details}} in use here it is clear that it is NOT suitable for the job -- it cannot hide the anchor link. (See WP:LINKING.) Need to re-apply the {{for2}} template, with wording adjusted to match/complement the new wording in Major Characters of the RWS. -- EdJogg (talk) 14:59, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:Emily the Engine.jpg

The image File:Emily the Engine.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --10:48, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Duck, Donald, Douglas and Oliver are in the rest of the Steam Team along with Thomas, Edward, Henry, Gordon, James, Percy, Toby and Emily

You know that Duck is a better number 8 than Emily! He's number 8 after Toby, Donald is number 9 after Duck, Douglas is number 10 after Donald, and Oliver IS number 11 after Douglas! Duck, Donald, Douglas and Oliver ARE after Toby and before Emily! So SHUT UP! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.197.16.8 (talk) 05:39, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

This website (which is offical Thomas website) says that Thomas, Edward, Henry, Gordon, James, Percy, Toby and Emily are apart of the steam Team and doesn't mention anything about Duck, Donald, Douglas and Oliver being apart of the Steam Team. CourtneyBonnick (talk) 08:55, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Duck the Great Western Engine

If Duck appeared in the seasons 17 and 18, will he stay in the series forever?

Oliver the Great Western Engine

If Oliver returned in the season 18, can he stay in the series forever? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.23.44.186 (talk) 19:51, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Daisy's last appearance is "Calling All Engines!"

Because Daisy's last appearance is "Calling All Engines!", I do not want to see Daisy again.