Template talk:Pirates

Add Roche Braziliano in famous pirates!
This link was added to the template by  Def lag ro   Contribs/Talk 00:24, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Add Bill Johnston (pirate) in famous pirates!
I consider him to be important enough to warrant a place in this template. He has enjoyed a certain fame since his presence on Sid Meier's Pirates. I vote yea. Witbcoedus 23:14, 16 October 2007 (UTC)


 * That article seems like a stub since the intro is longer than the article. Also I am in the process of redoing this template because we had a few complaints of it being intrusive. The new one will be a banner along the bottom of the page.  Def lag ro   C/T 23:29, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
 * After looking at a few other articles on the template I have added Roche Braziliano  Def lag ro   C/T 02:18, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

I added Ushkuiniks to the list of types of pirates in the template. They're pirates, the article is a pain in the ass to find otherwise and maybe with some more exposure it'll get filled out more. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.209.109.81 (talk) 17:40, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Thoughts
the template's looking awesome, but it's really getting huge now.. I was just wondering on the viability of creating a separate template with just a timeline of piracy - opinions? shasYarr!/T 09:08, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
 * The "famous pirates" section needs to be reduced significantly. I mean, do we really need to list every single one of them? Maybe we should just reduce the list to only the most famous ones, and direct the readers to a more exhaustive article/list. I think everyone appreciates the fact that someone tried to alphabetically organize all of the names for easier navigation, but still; the way the template looks now, it's probably the largest template I've ever seen on Wikipedia.--71.112.145.102 (talk) 18:08, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I can't read most of the names of the famous pirates. I think that portion of the template needs to be condensed to a list.  --Son (talk) 02:13, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Add Jack Sparrow to fictional pirates!
Yeah, add Jack. He is a very popular pirate.--Carolinapanthersfan (talk) 15:45, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
 * As this is a wiki, you are encouraged to be bold and make the edit yourself. Best regards &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:49, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

also, monkey d luffy comes to mind... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.31.126.84 (talk) 13:57, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Could someone add Jack Sparrow to the Fictional Pirates section? Because Jack Sparrow has been in three(and soon to be four), Pirate films(Pirates of the Caribbean). Therefore, Jack Sparrow NEEDS to be in this Template. 75.91.0.219 (talk) 10:46, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
 * &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 17:20, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 May 2014
Lawrence Prince

75.80.129.37 (talk) 04:06, 5 May 2014 (UTC)


 * ✅ - no reason he shouldn't be included. Stalwart 111  05:28, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 May 2014
Vincenzo Gambi

75.80.129.37 (talk) 04:41, 9 May 2014 (UTC)


 * ✅ - no reason he shouldn't be included. Stalwart 111  05:36, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 May 2014
Roche Braziliano

75.80.129.37 (talk) 04:43, 9 May 2014 (UTC)


 * ✅ - no reason he shouldn't be included. Stalwart 111  05:36, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 July 2014
Confederate privateer

75.80.129.37 (talk) 05:25, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

If you want to suggest a change, please request this in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ". Please also cite reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to any article. - Arjayay (talk) 14:59, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: as you have not requested a change.


 * ✅. Request is the same as those above by the same IP editor. Not really a "type of pirate" so I've included it under Miscellaneous.  St ★ lwart 1 1 1 23:31, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Organization
This template is quite disorganized, and in its current state is not as useful as it could be. There seems to be no order in the listings. Some sections have so many articles that the listing ceases being useful. This is supposed to be a navigation template, right? --Bejnar (talk) 20:49, 13 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Agree 100%. I've long thought that removing all fictional pirates to a separate template would be a good start. Fictional presidents aren't included in the template US Presidents.  St ★ lwart 1 1 1 00:48, 14 August 2014 (UTC)


 * We could also split "modern piracy" and "golden age piracy" into two different templates with "see also" notes from each.  St ★ lwart 1 1 1 00:53, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Both those ideas sound great. --Bejnar (talk) 03:50, 14 August 2014 (UTC)


 * I concur that it's about time this mammoth template was overhauled, it really is neither use nor ornament at this stage. It's currently taking over things that should be the preserve of categories and/or articles at the moment. I think there's scope for individual templates for the periods of piracy, types of pirate, and piracy by geographical area. The rest should not be linked by a template but collected in a category, as they already are (Famous pirates, Pirate ships, Pirate hunters, Pirate battles and incidents, and Fictional pirates.) The lists section might belong on a template, but 'Miscellaneous' and 'Literature' should be in relevant articles, and not collected by a template. As for the slave trade section, though occasionally intertwined with piracy, this is something else altogether, and just shows how this template has hoovered up far too many subjects and articles of increasingly tangential connection with each other. Benea (talk) 14:31, 14 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Agreed. The template Pirates of the Modern Age could be changed to Golden Age of Piracy, with subsections for pirates, locations, misc., etc. There could also be a template for Pirates in popular culture and Piracy in the 21st century. At the top/bottom of each of these templates could be a link to the eponymous articles for each of these templates; alternatively, we could use a Sidebar with collapsible lists ("Part of a series on Piracy") for navigating between the whole range of piracy articles. — (talk) 00:10, 3 November 2021 (UTC)


 * Note that there is already a well-organized Barbary Corsairs template. — (talk) 23:31, 16 November 2021 (UTC)


 * A further possibility would be to allow this template to take a parameter. For example, could produce a navbox with a row of articles on piracy law, followed by a collapsed group/navbox containing the rest of the Pirates template. —  (talk) 15:19, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Edit request
Kindly add Miguel Enríquez (privateer) to the "Pirate Hunters" sections. For more information, please read the article. 24.41.138.145 (talk) 00:47, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
 * In particular, note that by 1705 he was regarded as the one responsible for "controlling contraband and piracy" in the eastern Spanish Caribbean (reference #59 of that article). Since 1705 was in the midst of the Golden Age of Piracy and he was quite successful at locally controlling piracy during its absolute peak, that IMO makes his accomplishment notable enough to be included as a pirate hunter in this template. 172.56.0.29 (talk) 14:22, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done Pishcal  — ♣ 16:34, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 May 2015
Remove "pegleg". That's just silly. 62.194.104.217 (talk) 18:00, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

62.194.104.217 (talk) 18:00, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
 * ❌ - We have an article on Pegleg and, although more associated with pirates in fiction, than in fact, it seems as suitable a listing under Miscellaneous as Eyepatch - Arjayay (talk) 18:11, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 January 2019
Please remove the Falklands Expedition from the "Pirate battles and incidents" section, as it has no obvious significant relation to piracy. 174.90.223.45 (talk) 08:33, 13 January 2019 (UTC)


 * ❌. From the target article's infobox, "Objective: Investigate reports of piracy", which is explained a bit more in the rest of the article.  So unless I'm missing something here, there seems to be a connection.  –Deacon Vorbis (carbon &bull; videos) 15:31, 13 January 2019 (UTC)