Talk:Thomas the Tank Engine

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

best known?[edit]

This doesn't need a citation, it needs to be removed. It's not verifiable and adds nothing to this article Rtphokie

I think his world-wide recognition does indeed add a lot to the article, so I've changed the wording slightly to reflect this. Gonzerelli 13:14, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

More then 3 Links, some not needed?[edit]

At the botom of the page, there are a number of links. Wikipedia articles in general should only have three links, and should try to stick to offical sites, or very informative and factual sites that offer more information. Obviously the "Thomas the Tank Engine .com Official website" link needs to be kept, but with no disrecpect, I'm concern that the "Criticism Talking Pictures" sites and "iRail" do not seem offer a informative and factual view of the series itself, and are more concerned about a unrelated topic (though both do cover the series.) The fourth link "" seems to offer very little information, so I would like to suggest that only the fullying links are used...

The Real Thomas - Offical Website - Thomas Blog -

I am not sure about using a blog, but as it is dedicated to Thomas the Tankengine and stays informative it seems acceptable?

Roving Thomas[edit]

I don't know which railroad does it, but one of the U.S. railroads has a Thomas the Tank Engine that tours the country for festivals and other special events. --Tim4christ17 22:57, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

I added some information on this subject. Thomas can only appear as part of a licensed Day Out with Thomas event. n2xjk 21:01, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
Excellent, thanks for that. Gonzerelli 05:59, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Missing Origins?[edit]

In the section 'Thomas in the Railway Series' it talks about Thomas being rebuilt. The paragraph ended with the cryptic line:

For the reasons behind this, see 'Origins of Thomas'.

This wasn't a link to another page, and there's nothing in the current page that this corresponds to so I've cut it. If someone knows what it should be referring to they can put it back. --Xurble 15:37, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

"Fictional Hero"??[edit]

An unregistered user has been continually adding the Category:Fictional heroes to the bottom of this article.

You could hardly call Thomas a "hero", no more than you could call Gordon a "hero". A protagonist, possibly, still not quite appropriate but more accurate.

This category has been removed, and will continue to be removed if added incessantly. Gonzerelli 01:59, 14 November 2006 (UTC)


i have a question,I am wondering which of the Thomas the tank engine series are the original ones ( the ones in the 80's narrated by Ringo Starr). i can not find this/

Firstly, this information is available on the page for the TV Series itself (Thomas the Tank Engine and Friends).
The first two seasons of the Series were narrated by Ringo Starr. These two seasons have their own articles:- Season 1, Season 2.
Gonzerelli 06:06, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Christian Animation?[edit]

Does anybody actually know why this is classed as "Christian Animation"? Apart from the occasional vague moral (which can be found virtually any children's program, such as "don't tell lies", etc.) and the fact the character was created by a clergyman, I can find little evidence to suggest it is specifically a Christian series.

Because it was originally written by a rather crusty old vicar, perhaps? 02:19, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Well several times Christmas has been metioned and celebrated. Father Christmas/Santa Claus has even made an appearence. Diesel 10 10:43, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Christmas (and Santa Clause) are in childrens series all the time, I don't see any reason why that would make this show christian —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:28, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Season 2[edit]

In Double Trouble, why is Thomas wearing a face that looks like a female face? TobytheTramEngine 19:06, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, they got different facemasks for S2. That's probably why--S.C.Ruffeyfan (talk) 16:23, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Starlight Express[edit]

Andrew Lloyd Webber has stated the original intent of his Show Starlight Express was to pay tribute to Thomas, which is why I added this info.Thenextstephensondheim1 23:55, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

OK, but we need a Reliable Source to back this up. The information was already on the Starlight Express page and has hence been mirrored all over the web. Unless this can be proved, it needs to be removed from both pages.
EdJogg 08:17, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
Reference was removed today (by an anon), as unsourced. Try as I might, I cannot find a reputable source for the rumour. Lloyd-Webber's own pages do not mention any link, nor do the those describing the show at The Really Useful Company -- and Richard Stilgoe appears not to have a website. Nevertheless, it is possible to find several web sources to back up the rumour (eg theatre reviews) but nothing concrete. Has Lloyd-Webber written an autobiography?
EdJogg 01:35, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
Found a citeable reference!! But where did they get the info from? "The Cambridge Guide to Literature in English" By Ian Ousby (page 47) Cambridge University Press (1994 - ISBN 0521440866) Entry for Rev W. V. Awdry, final para: "Starlight Express (1984), a stage musical by Andrew Lloyd Webber and Richard Stilgoe loosely based on Awdry's train characters, has since proved extremely successful.")
EdJogg 02:34, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
How stupid!! It was under my nose all the time - have a look at pages 288 to 291 of The Thomas the Tank Engine Man, and it's all there. Time to put the web to rights!! Ref to follow in due course. EdJogg 02:56, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
I added a section to the page, with a quote from the Composer, proving the 'Starlight' theory to be true. Why was it deleted? ElphaPearl (talk) 13:49, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
It was deleted because it was untrue. Starlight Express was not based on the Thomas the Tank Engine books. As the Starlight Express article clearly explains, Weber wanted to create a Thomas-based musical, but couldn't secure the rights from Awdry. Instead he wrote a musical about trains. It cannot be claimed that the version of Starlight Express that was written is based on Thomas - it clearly isn't. The Starlight Express article already covers this, there is no need to add it to this article since the connection is so minor. Gwernol 13:53, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Strange Factor[edit]

I saw two copies that talk about Thomas. Can I remove the one on the bottom? TobytheTramEngine 04:32, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Already done it! Be BOLD! (You don't need to ask about this sort of thing, as it is obviously an accident.) However, I strongly recommend using the 'diff' facility on the page history to compare across multiple versions -- that way you can double-check that anti-vandal work (for example) has not changed the article unexpectedly. EdJogg 08:53, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
Oh, sorry. Well, I only asked because I was afraid if I reverted that edit, someone would revert it. TobytheTramEngine (talk) 04:33, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Sugar Coated?[edit]

Loads of the people I know are calling Thomas and Friends sugar coated. How do you call a Crane falling down causing engines to be trapped sugar coated? S.C.Ruffeyfan 15:00, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Thomas the Tank Sodor Island Map[edit]

Hi can anyone help me I have A very old SODOR ISLAND MAP I think it 1960s am thinking of listing it on ebay would like it to go to a good home,i saw one a while back go for over £100 but mine is not quite so good,any info would be nice thanks TRI-ANG-TT 21:35, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Ignoring the fact that this is not the purpose of Wikipedia (many editors would simply have deleted your edit as irrelevant to WP)...
Your map should easily sell on eBay, especially if it is an early example. I suggest you watch the other maps for sale for a while to get an idea of how the condition of yours compares and what an appropriate starting price might be.
EdJogg 08:12, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

How about some protection?[edit]

Looking at the history of this article, it seems to be a pretty regular target for vandalism from haters and fans alike. Does anyone else think it might be time to request some sort of protection?HonestTom (talk) 15:51, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome to try! Needs to be some form of long-term semi-protection, but I'm not sure whether they will go for that. Mostly semi-protection is used to prevent attacks over a short period of time. EdJogg (talk) 11:24, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Real Engines[edit]

Having a Thomas obsessed small son we recently visited the Nene Valley Railway (NVR) who have a "Thomas" engine. I was surprised to find there is no reference to them in this article.

The NVR website ( states that their Thomas is a Hudswell Clarke engine 0-6-0T No. 1800 which was built in 1947 and spent all its working life at the British Sugar Corporation's Peterborough factory. They show a photograph of the Rev W Awdry in 1971 naming No. 1800 "Thomas".

--Thealmondtree (talk) 07:53, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

There is a reference at Day out with Thomas, although it is arguable whether the text should be moved here instead or not. I think there used to be a picture of it here that was removed for reasons of copyright.
A number of engines have been dressed-up as Thomas (or as other characters). Although we could have a list of them here, unless the lists can be referenced from published sources there is no proof to indicate that the list is complete (and there is the risk that the list could grow too large).
Thank you for your observation, nonetheless.
EdJogg (talk) 23:42, 5 September 2008 (UTC)


At the moment, it says: "Thomas the Tank Engine first appeared in 1294", which is presume isn't true, although I don't know the correct date; indeed that whole sentence seems somewhat garbled. Maybe this was some kind of vandalism? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:07, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Since fixed. Sadly Wikipedia attracts many people who seem to have nothing better to do than disrupt what we're trying to achieve. This article is one of several that attracts higher-than-average attention from them...
The only solution is to carefully watch EVERY edit to the page, and revert as necessary. A quick examination of the 'history' tab will allow you to check for recent edits and obvious vandalism.
EdJogg (talk) 12:24, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Listen with Mother[edit]

The main article gives credit to Britt Allcroft for creating a TV verison, but no mention is made of the reading of the stories on 'listen with mother' (BBC home service) in the 1950s. My mother often spoke of my childhood fascination with these tales (the banking engine's refrain of 'I know I can, I know I can' being read out to emphasise the sound of an exhaust note) --Brunnian (talk) 22:37, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Before my time :o)
We can certainly add this in if we have any references to back it up. -- EdJogg (talk) 12:38, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Anthropomorphic, or Personified?[edit]

The only thing anthropomorphic, or of 'human form', would be the bas relief mug plastered on the front of the engines. Anthropomorphic doesn't seem to fit quite right. Personified isn't quite on the mark either. The engines sport visages. That said, can we get rid of the term anthropomorphic in the many Thomas articles and come up with something better? Technically, 'anthro' might be grudgingly correct—but not by much. (talk) 04:07, 9 January 2010 (UTC)WikiPaull

This terminology has been discussed before -- the characters were described as 'sub-anthropomorphic', until it was realised that this was a term seemingly made-up for the benefit of WP articles! If there is a better word, then we can consider using it, but for now I suggest we leave 'as is'. -- EdJogg (talk) 12:36, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
I thought anthropomorphism meant having human form, thoughts or emotions and can be seen as representing facets of human personality and character traits. I would argue that TRS does this, not just by simply putting a human face on the front of an engine, and that the term does apply.—User:MDCollins (talk) 11:14, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Slate article on imperialism[edit]

I found:

It talks about imperialistic views in the Railway series WhisperToMe (talk) 04:17, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

"Really useful engine" - first appearance[edit]

When did the phrase "Really useful engine" first appear? This may be the source. Dick Dilworth, designer of the EMD GP7 locomotive, which established the boxy pattern of almost all modern freight locomotives: "In planning the GP, I had two dreams. The first was to make a locomotive so ugly in appearance that no railroad would want it on the main line or anywhere near headquarters, but would keep it out as far as possible in the back country, where it could do really useful work. My second dream was to make it so simple in construction and so devoid of Christmas-tree ornaments and other whimsy that the price would be materially below our standard main-line freight locomotives." [1] That quote is from a 1954 book, and that series of locomotives started in 1949. --John Nagle (talk) 19:06, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

"Thomas the Train"[edit]

Looking e.g. at, there are lots of products named after something called "Thomas the Train", which seems to be just the same as Thomas the Tank Engine. Is "Thomas the Train" a valid name in the US? In Wikipedia, "Thomas the Train" redirects to the article "Thomas & Friends", not this article. Why? (talk) 02:31, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Can`t find the date of the change to CGI ?[edit]

I couldn`t find the date of the change (from models) to CGI) in the TV series. If it`s in the article it should be more prominent, arguably it`s the most significant change to Thomas the Tank Engine since it was first written. There is an exhaustive list of all the narrators yet this more significant change is either omitted or buried !--JustinSmith (talk) 15:38, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

@JustinSmith: The change to CGI happened in 2008. --ACase0000 (talk) 03:08, 14 December 2015 (UTC)