Talk:Thomas

This disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject Disambiguation, an attempt to structure and organize all disambiguation pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, you can edit the page attached to this talk page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.DisambiguationWikipedia:WikiProject DisambiguationTemplate:WikiProject DisambiguationDisambiguation articles

Thomas

This disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject Thomas, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Thomas the Tank Engine on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ThomasWikipedia:WikiProject Animation/Thomas & Friends task forceTemplate:WikiProject ThomasThomas articles

List

Listing people who had the surname Thomas is futile enough, we don't need to start listing all the people with the same first name, too.

I did, however, notice that a few people were called Thomas of something, including Aquinas, so these could be included in the list of those known by one name... --Joy [shallot] 13:49, 26 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I disagree, people may be interested in the origin of their name 1:09 November 25 2005

Moved all the personal names into the "Thomas" list of names

Since the article already described the other list List_of_people_by_name:_Tho#Thom, I moved all the personal names there.

Religious

However, in recent centuries the name has lost what religious sense that it held.

Ok, which was the religious sense that this name held? Moreover, which name used by religious figures along history has kept its religious sense? The quotation above seems to me to be unprecise and irrelevant. 201.6.119.5 15:00, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas genealogy

I would like to see the Thomas family geneology added to this article. What do you think? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Agthoma (talk • contribs) 03:24, 8 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

I don't believe there is a single 'Thomas' family; I think there are many, many families called Thomas. Thus, a 'Thomas family genealogy' would be impractical and meaningless to add to this article. Skittle 14:37, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Aramaic/ Hebrew

It says that it "originated from the Aramaic designation תום or Tôm." I can read Hebrew and תום is Tom in Hebrew. Is it supposed to say that Tom is Aramaic, or does Aramaic use the same characters as Hebrew? Just curious. Sir Akroy 00:56, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Aramaic alphabet is the source of the Hebrew 'square script', and many varieties of Aramaic are written in this script. It's just better known as Hebrew. — Gareth Hughes 11:22, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The name Thomas can also be Greek.

Other abbreviations

What about the abbreviation Thos? I think it's still valid even though it's a bit antiquated.

Companies

Is the German tableware company Thomas significant enough to warrant an encyclopaedia entry? I think so (which is why I looked for one)16:24, 5 September 2022 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Truthordare (talk • contribs)

Requested move 20 February 2024

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Page views shows that Thomas the Apostle is remotely close. –wbm1058 (talk) 02:40, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas → Thomas (disambiguation)
Thomas (name) → Thomas

– The given name is the primary topic. Nothing else is even remotely close. Clarityfiend (talk) 11:57, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, Thomas the Apostle, Thomas (surname), and List of people with given name Thomas are all likely for "Thomas". 162 etc. (talk) 17:25, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'd say anthroponymy is the primary topic, but it's not necessarily clear where to go from there. Do we consider the spread of clicks towards the various split anthroponymy topics an indication that we need a broad concept article? --Joy (talk) 08:25, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.