Talk:List of Thomas & Friends non-rail vehicles

This article was nominated for deletion on 22 August 2020. The result of the discussion was merge.

Terence the Tractor was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 16 August 2020 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into List of Thomas & Friends non-rail vehicles. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.

.

I requested, on behalf of WikiProject Thomas, that this article be protected (for a period) from anonymous edits. This was due to a large number of edits regarding On Site with Thomas.

Please read the below section carefully.

On Site With Thomas

**UPDATED**

At this stage, there is not enough verifiable information to confirm that the DVD On Site with Thomas forms a part of the TV Series.

At this stage, it appears to be a separate release, as Calling All Engines was. Calling All Engines is not considered canonical with the TV Series, and until information to the contrary is found, On Site With Thomas will be treated in the same fashion.

Pack characters who have only appeared in this DVD release, and not within the "series proper", may be included on the page for On Site with Thomas.

If you would like to discuss this, please feel free to add your thoughts to this Talk Page, or to check out WikiProject Thomas.

Gonzerelli 15:36, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Page protection is justified (even if only to maintain sanity!) but perhaps if the disputed characters had entries on the OSWT page itself, the problem would be alleviated to some extent. Currently On Site with Thomas links ALL the characters to this page, and when following the links, the reader will find them missing - it is therefore normal Wiki behaviour for them to want to add them here!

Alternatively, 'The Pack' should have its own page to which both OSWT and TV Series articles may refer (which is not that different to the handling for the splits between TV and book characters).

EdJogg 10:14, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The ideal situation, in my mind, would be to add Pack characters only introduced in On Site with Thomas on that page. There is plenty of room (with only six episodes needing coverage). I don't have a knowledge of the characters (having not seen any of the episodes myself), so I cannot verifiably make these edits. But I will initiate something...

Gonzerelli 12:05, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edits by numerous people have resulted in a rather cleaner handling of The Pack characters, with all of them being described in the one place (here!). (My apologies to WP:THOMAS members - I've only been correcting spelling and grammar!) However, it goes against the comments above regarding the split of OSWT from TtTE&F, and whether a direct-to-DVD release can be considered 'canon'.

SO, who decides whether, and on what criteria, OSWT should be considered canon or not?

EdJogg 13:08, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My thoughts on this are simple - "New" Pack characters have never appeared in the season proper. Just as Lady and Diesel 10 have never appeared in the TV Series (only the movies), these new characters have only ever appeared in episodes which are separate to the ten seasons of broadcast episodes. Gonzerelli 13:53, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Pack characters

The introduction to The Pack indicates that several new charaters were introduced in On Site with Thomas (also see the discussion above!). However, the character descriptions themselves, rather surprisingly, do not indicate which these are. This is a significant omission. EdJogg 13:11, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have recently made corrective edits to this. Now, this article clearly notes that there are four characters which have been introduced in OSWT, further to those on this page. These four characters have now been removed, and their profiles places on the OSWT page.

The reason for this has also been clearly indicated - the fact that the characters were never broadcast as part of the series proper (ie. its seasons).

Hopefully this starts to draw this conundrum to a close. Gonzerelli 16:51, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Section titles

Please note that the section titles in this article should contain the character's name only. Changing section titles (eg. to "Elizabeth the Vintage Lorry" rather than "Elizabeth") messes with anchored links from other articles.

The small amounts of information added to section titles can be read within the first sentence of the section anyway, so it is superfluous and repetitive to have more than the character's name in the section title.

For WP:THOMAS, Gonzerelli 01:42, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jeremy

I updated the likeness of Jeremy to no longer read "not like a Boeing or Airbus passenger jet.." to be "reminiscent of a corporate styled jet or a regional jet such as a Bombardier CRJ700 series jets. He does not look like an intercontinental jet typical of a Boeing or Airbus passenger jet."

It's a strange thing to have a disagreement over, but 144.36.136.86 changed it to Jeremy resembles a British Aerospace 125 corporate jet. I think Jeremy's nose looks much more like the Bombardier Bombardier CRJ700 series and Bombardier_Challenger_600 nose than the higher British Aerospace 125 144.36.136.86 suggested.

I'm adopting the simpler phrasing and retaining the Bombardier reference. Other's are welcome to judge

Bombardier Challenger 604

Bombardier Bombardier CRJ200ER

Hawker Beechcraft / British Aerospace 125

https://www.google.com/search?q=thomas+and+friends+jeremy+images mattclare (talk) 17:56, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Jeremy.jpg

Image:Jeremy.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 09:14, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Elizabeth2.jpg

Image:Elizabeth2.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot 01:57, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pictures

If you add a picture use this FUR.

==Summary==

This image is of the Thomas & Friends character: Name of Character (inclued link).

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 , Episode *: "Name of Episode"
Screen capture by: <name>or<URL>

===Fair use rationale===

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

Diesel 10 04:23, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stella

Why is she here?SHE DOESN'T EXIST!!!!!As far as i've been told,the Pack isn't even returning.-SLJCOAAATR —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.190.114.189 (talk) 19:10, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Pack is returning in The Great Discovery. It's been confirmed. I wrote to HiT. I got pics. The Pack were in one of them--S.C.Ruffeyfan 17:12, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:MaxMonty.jpg

Image:MaxMonty.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 04:11, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Bertiethesodorredbus TTI.jpg

Image:Bertiethesodorredbus TTI.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 03:26, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cite needed

ACase0000: "He will appear in season 19." I have asked for a cite twice. It has been removed twice.

The first time, the explanation was "not needed". Yes, it is needed. The claim is about a future event: Here's what will be in episodes that have not aired.

The second time, the explanation was "Seen Clip from episode. Therefore proof." Great for you. The article, however, still includes an unverifiable claim. Articles on kids' media are subject to various forms of delusion, confusion and outright vandalism. I frequently revert various claims about future events in these articles: forthcoming programming changes on various channels, reunion movies/revivals for long dead shows, future plot points, etc. For every Full House spin-off predicted that turns out to be mostly correct, there are dozens of future Ben marathons and Suite Life revivals that are completely baseless.

Yeah, I know, you're different. I've got dozens of others in the archives who were different as well. They either started sourcing their additions, ended up being repeatedly blocked for unsourced additions, graduated to full-on vandalism (there's a live-action Ben movie coming in 2023, with a complete cast list that includes two people who died before signing on...) or left the project.

There are two ways to deal with this that work:

Provide citations to reliable sources.
Wait until the material is verifiable.

While it would be swell to be able to trust that everyone editing Wikipedia is being honest, the history of this very article is full of proof that we cannot. - SummerPhD^v2.0 22:44, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@SummerPhDv2.0: Alright, I am sorry. I honestly wish I could add sources, but my device won't let me. --ACase0000 (talk) 23:09, 4 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Clean up

I get the feeling the majority of editors are young, American and don't read talk pages. So, I won't bother with details here. If anyone doesn't agree with my changes or disagrees with any of them, discuss it here. - SummerPhD^v2.0 22:39, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merge from Terence the Tractor

Hi, I've completed the merge from the Terence article whose AfD closed with a decision to merge. I didn't copy over what seemed to be excessive (and unsourced) in-universe details, but obviously they remain in the page history if anyone else wishes to consider any of them for copying across. I also didn't copy across the non-free image, since none of the characters in this list have images; if anyone disagrees and wants to move it over, be aware that I've had to tag it for deletion as an orphaned non-free image, so you only have a week to do so before it goes. YorkshireLad ✿ ^(talk) 12:52, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging AfD participants: Piotrus, Andrew Davidson, Ravenswing, Jontesta, Whiteguru. YorkshireLad ✿ ^(talk) 13:00, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the well done merger. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:47, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]