Talk:List of Talyllyn Railway rolling stock

John Bate the builder

Who is John Bate the builder, (not the author, though it's probably the same person)? He is mentioned twice in the 'Engineering plant' section: as "John Bate / Pendre Works" (flail mower, my personal fetish...) and again as plain "John Bate" (Toby the trolley). Did he build the trolley himself? Did he build the mower in Pendre works but the trolley in his back garden? Yes, I'm being facetious, but this looks weird... --Jotel (talk) 21:18, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Not a facetious question - it should be explained. As you supposed, it is the same person - he was the Chief Engineer of the Talyllyn for many years after preservation. I'll see if I can find a way to explain this in the article somewhere. —  Tivedshambo  _(t/c) 21:24, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

John was the designer of both projects - I believe they were both built at Pendre - would assume with the assistance of the works staff - without a copy of "Pendre Sidings" - (his book) in front of me I can't give the exact details - I should have quizzed him yesterday! Willsmith3 (talk) 21:43, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Early preservation i/c locos

Do you think we should separate this into the current stock and former stock - either by moving the Ford Tractor and the Charley's Ant to a new table as former locomotives / early preservation stock or move them to the bottom of the current table (underneath No 10) - just makes it visibly clear the locos are no longer on the railway Willsmith3 (talk) 21:49, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Another way to do this would be to added a "Scrapped Date" column, which should make it clear what happened to them. This information is already in the Notes, but separating it out would make it more obvious. Thoughts? Gwernol 21:52, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Personally, I more inclined to go with Will's suggestion and have a former locomotives section. This would leave the current 1-10 clearer in just two tables, albeit slightly out of numerical order. —  Tivedshambo  _(t/c) 21:58, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Adding a 'Scrapped date' column would mean squeezing even more info across the screen. And this column would be almost always empty, thus being mostly a waste of space. Therefore if the distinction between the current & former stock is to be made more prominent, having a separate table is better. Or may be a different background in rows with the expired stock?? Just an idea...--Jotel (talk) 07:53, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

I've split this to another table as this seems to be consensus. I've put in a year withdrawn column at the expense of the wheel diameter column, which was blank. I think date withdrawn is beter than year scrapped for two reasons - firstly I don't know if there is any information about when "Charley's Ant" was scrapped, and secondly, I recall reading a proposal that the current number 5, Midlander, may be withdrawn from active service, possibly into the museum. If that happens, it can be moved into the table. —  Tivedshambo  _(t/c) 08:08, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Mower photo

I had a go at the original photo with PhotoShop, uploaded the result which looks better (he would say that, wouldn't he...), and replaced the image in the table. Of course feel free to revert (as if anybody needed my permission)--Jotel (talk) 07:35, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Looks good to me. —  Tivedshambo  _(t/c) 07:37, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Not a problem with me Willsmith3 (talk) 11:07, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Carriage Photographs

I have uploaded the photos of the Brown Marshalls stock I took last week - the picture of Van 5 isn't brilliant as it shows the rear of the coach rather than the platform side with the sliding doors and booking office window so if anyone can find a replacement that would be good! Unfortunately they were parked on the loop so I couldn't access the front without climbing up the bank! Willsmith3 (talk) 23:16, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Sortable tables?

Any objections if I add formatting to the locomotive and carriage tables to make them sortable so that readers can arrange them by year built / boiler pressure etc? - I use this on the article for the neighbouring Fairbourne Railway and it seems to work well. I'll leave the wagon one for now until we have filled some of the blanks Willsmith3 (talk) 09:26, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Go for it! —  Tivedshambo  _(t/c) 09:36, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

No objection (at least from me), but IMHO this feature will be in practice unused. The table is small enough to get sorted 'by hand', assuming anybody wants to sort locomotives by boiler pressure:-)
But by all means do it if you want, it's your time and effort after all. --Jotel (talk) 09:39, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Some tables now sortable - this can be reverted easily if people don't like it! Willsmith3 (talk) 13:47, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

New format table

I've reformatted the table for steam locos, putting the notes underneath the other columns rather than squeezed to the side. If people find this acceptable, I'll do the same with other tables. One disadvantage is that sorting doesn't work, so I've removed it. Any comments? —  Tivedshambo  _(t/c) 16:36, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Towards Featured List status

I don't know if anyone else is watching this page, but I'm aiming to propose this for Featured List status soon. I'll probably take it to peer review first. The only things still outstanding, as far as I'm aware, are to provide page numbers for the few remaining references which just list Boyd's books (currently notes 57 and 58), plus provide a couple of other references for statements not currenly verified. Does anyone else have any comments before I go any further? —  Tivedshambo  _{(t/c) (logged on as Pek)} 10:43, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

I've got this about as far as I can - I've tidied up the wagon section, checking refs and fixing as necessary. I'm now nominating it for Peer Review - any comments or suggestions would be welcome. —  Tivedshambo  _(t/c) 22:03, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

I'll endeavour to take pictures of the remaining carriages and get some more up to date pictures of the locomotives as soon as possible. No 1 and No 2 and diesel 10 are in new liveries and the picture of No 3 is a little old. - Unfortunately most of the time I'm on the railway it i'm working and I don't get round to taking pictures! Congratulations everybody's work so far  Willsmith3  _(Talk) 22:51, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

I took some friends there yesterday, and managed to get some more photos of wagons which I'll upload soon. —  Tivedshambo  _(t/c) 10:04, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Diesel Table

The diesel table has now been separated for No's 11 & 12, something I was going to get round to in due course, so thanks for getting there first. However, we have now lost the information regarding the third Baguley, which is being used a source of spares. Any suggestions where to add this information? I also have a photo I have taken of No.11 which could be added, but being a relatively new user I'm not sure how to do this. 13tsf13 (talk) 16:41, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi - I kept the information about the third loco - it's now note 3, referred to in the blurb about St Cadfan. The only thing I lost was the photo of it, as I couldn't really see a way of keeping it. You can find info on how to upload images at Wikipedia:Uploading images, though that's a bit technical. Optimist on the run (talk) 21:04, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Conflict of interest

For the sake of openness, I am declaring a conflict of interest as I am now an unpaid volunteer on the Talyllyn. My edits will be limited to technical and historical information as much as possible, in order to improve this list. — O Still Small Voice of Clam 16:35, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

Removal of "Thomas and Friends" equivalents

There is a clear one-to-one relationship between the Talyllyn locomotives and Skarloey Railway locomotives from The Railway Series by Rev W Awdry (and later Christopher Awdry), e.g. Skarloey is based on Talyllyn, Rheneas on Dolgoch, etc. This can be referenced from several reliable, independent sources, e.g. The Thomas The Tank Engine Man by Brian Sibley. However I cannot find any reliable sources for the locos added by the Thomas & Friends TV series (Smudger, etc.). It appears to be based on observation, fancruft, and other WP:OR. I therefore propose to remove the Thomas & Friends equivalents, and just keep the Railway Series locos, which I'll properly reference. — O Still Small Voice of Clam 19:09, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

New Battery Locomotive!

https://twitter.com/TalyllynNews/status/1503448474020425732

Not named, so how do we add to article? Thebrakeman2 (talk) 23:23, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

At present, do nothing. Twitter is not a reliable source, and there is no information on what the loco is, or its purpose. — Voice of Clam 07:14, 15 March 2022 (UTC)