# Talk:Black Sails (TV series)

WikiProject Piracy (Rated C-class)
This article lies in the latitude of WikiProject Piracy, a crew of scurvy editors bound to sharpen up all Wikipedia's piracy-related articles. If you want to ship with us and help improve this and other Piracy-related articles, lay aboard the project page and sign on for a berth.
C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
WikiProject Television (Rated C-class, Low-importance)
C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

## Requested move 27 January 2015

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Dab page has already been restored. Favonian (talk) 10:37, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Black Sails (TV series)Black Sails – Undoing January 15 move that added the "TV series" disambiguation. There is no other page with the exact title "Black Sails" and currently that page just redirects here. No disambiguation was needed, and the hatnote is fine. Wikipedical (talk) 03:40, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

• Oppose the Jan 15 move at moved the disambiguation page not this page. This page was not moved. To reverse the Jan 15 move, the disambiguation page should be returned to "Black Sails", where it has existed from 2007-2015. Further, this isn't the only title called "Black Sails". -- 65.94.40.137 (talk) 08:53, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
• REVERT the Jan 15 move, restore the disambiguation page to the base name, as it has been since 2007. -- 65.94.40.137 (talk) 08:53, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
• The television series is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for the term "Black Sails." There are no other articles with that exact title, as the disambiguation page shows. -- Wikipedical (talk) 00:27, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
• Oppose, REVERT undiscussed dab displacement - it's a 2014 TV series which is current now at (TV series), which is fine, there are other subjects in other articles which is what WP:DAB counts not titles. As 65.94.40.137 restore the dab to dab position since 2007, lets not make work for when the next "Black Sails" topic is added. In ictu oculi (talk) 01:49, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
• Oppose – it's RECENTISM to assume that this is the PRIMARYTOPIC, and it's likely to be mostly forgotten in a couple of years. So it should stay at Black Sails (TV series). --IJBall (talk) 07:00, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

## Thomas Hamilton

I don't want to start an argument about the possible/appropriate meaning of "occupation", but in any case the current entry for Thomas Hamilton is simply false. He is not a member of the navy, but the navy provides him with a navy officer as advisor/assistent (being Captain Flint in the past).--Kmhkmh (talk) 10:24, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Is what has been set sufficient? AlexTheWhovian (talk) 14:45, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

## Tom Hopper

Similar to the case above the current information given for Tom Hopper/Billy Bones is incorrect. He ist not a guest star but was starring from episode 1 of season 2 on, it is clearly a recurring role and he is clearly a part of the regular cast.--Kmhkmh (talk) 13:11, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Which is why he is listed in the Regular Cast table, with the Season 2 table cell set as Recurring. AlexTheWhovian (talk) 14:45, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
Yes, now.--Kmhkmh (talk) 15:20, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

There is still no proper reason for the exclusion of that youtube link. If none will be given I will put it in again.--Kmhkmh (talk) 23:34, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

Oops sorry apparently the last revert did provide a "reason" in the version history, it is however completely false. The link does provide extra information (and "understanding") for the article, which of course was exactly the reason to add it in the first place and imho that is fairly obvious (if one looks at).
But just in case I'll spell it out here explicitly. The link provides an abundance of video material on the series, including various trailers, clips from episodes, interviews and cast & staff. So it provides the reader with various information our article does not have and in particular it provides audiovisual information/impressions of the cast, the series' setting and production.--Kmhkmh (talk) 23:45, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

## WP:Prose vs. table format for cast lists

Opinions are needed on the following matter: Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Television#WP:Prose vs. table format for cast lists. A WP:Permalink for it is here. Flyer22 (talk) 06:13, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

To most television series that have been aired in other countries (other than the producing country) is a part added to the article. Here are some examples- A Touch of Frost [1], Midsummer Murders [2] or Taggart[3] or Wire in the Blood [4] This is certainly not to be confused with WP:TVINTL rules, as these lists has nothing at all to do with Wikipedia "a TV-guide" ! Hundereds of contributors have helped to make such lists possible. And the subject is naturally of encyclopedic value - how well spread a certain TV-series is. But User:AlexTheWhovian has prohibit me to begin such a list here, as Black Sails (second series) currently is aired in Denmark. I don't see the trouble. 83.249.183.253 (talk) 01:18, 26 November 2015 (UTC) Sorry thought I was logged on. Boeing720 (talk) 01:19, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

Actually, those articles as examples are now invalid, given that they've been cleaned up. And here's a quote from WP:TVINTL - "editors are encouraged to instead detail noteworthy (see next paragraph) foreign broadcasts, from English-speaking countries, through prose form". Firstly: Prose form, not lists or tables, so those articles are invalid again. Secondly: English-speaking countries. As I've told you again and again and again and again. Alex|The|Whovian 01:24, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
WP:TVINTL rule begins When detailing a show's international broadcasting, simply listing every channel the series appears on is discouraged; Wikipedia is not a television guide. Apart from the channel of origin for the series${\displaystyle *}$, editors are encouraged to instead detail noteworthy (see next paragraph) foreign broadcasts, from English-speaking countries, through prose form. This section is best named simply "Broadcast" and should also address broadcasting in the country of origin. ${\displaystyle *}$ This is in a section about airing abroad ! So I do believe User:AlexTheWhovian hasn't read WP:TVINTL carefully enough. There is no need to list all foreign broadcasters, just the first in each country.Boeing720 (talk) 01:44, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
And what about the quote I gave you about ENGLISH-SPEAKING COUNTRIES? Funny you happened to skip over that. And the part you underlined is about the CHANNEL of origin, not the COUNTRY of origin. Alex|The|Whovian 01:51, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
You are currently arguing at such a low level that I really shouldn't reply. The essential contence comes first. Funny ? No !. In my mind, by deleting every "international broadcaster" (international = other than production country). You are on the road to distruction for what 100's of contributors have built up, due to a low level and incorrecttly interpreted WP:style. You also say that WP:style is old. But just hold it right there and think - howcome all these lists still have grown up ? My answer is - they are called for. And it is indeed of encycclopedical value to know how many (and to which) contries a certain TV-series has been exported to. You go on about English speaking countries, but completely forget that we are obliged to use a global point of view. Which is far more importaint than WP:TVINTNL. Which readers might benefit from all the information You have erased so far ? (retorical - none at all) Boeing720 (talk) 19:15, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
Actually, you're wrong, we are not obliged at all to use a global point of view. We are the English-based server of Wikipedia, and hence are only obliged to give content from an English-language-based point of view. Always have, always will. Policy dictates this, and hence every time you plan to go against it, you will be reverted. And hundreds of editors? Don't exaggerate. And do try to spell correctly and string sentences together properly - you're the low level here. Alex|The|Whovian 00:46, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

## List of Black Sails characters

The list of characters has been split to List of Black Sails characters, and hence only main cast are now listed on this page. Alex|The|Whovian? 14:29, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

## Date

The article says that the series is set roughly two decades before the events of Treasure Island. However, the Wikipedia article on Treasure Island [[5]] that the book is set in either 1754 or 1757. Since the series begins in 1715, it seems as if the article should say that the series is set roughly four decades before the events of Treasure Island. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.58.25.115 (talk) 00:12, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

You need a tertiary source to support this, instead of basing it on original research. Alex|The|Whovian? 00:44, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

## Requested move 8 January 2017

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved as it is not clear that this topic has lasting significance compared to other topics on the disambiguation page. Closed without prejudice against reopening this discussion if Black Sails EP is deleted. (closed by page mover) Bradv 20:07, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

– The television series is undoubtedly the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for the proper noun Black Sails, and it's the only article using disambiguation with that exact title. The TV series is the primary topic with respect to usage and long-term significance, and over the last 6 months it has had 680,000+ views, while the EP has had 5500+ views. -- Wikipedical (talk) 04:21, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

• Oppose for the same reasons given by other opposers in the previous failed move request above, particularly WP:RECENTISM. In fact, the "usage and long-term significance" referred to by the nominator is precisely why this page is not the primary topic: the primary meaning of "black sails" is that of a general cultural trope associated with pirates, a trope that has been in existence for hundreds of years. Ask the average person on the street about "black sails", and he will likely know about the association with pirates, but not about this television series, a mildly successful but certainly not culturally dominant television series which is already announced to be ending its run and be in its last year for a total run of only four years. —Lowellian (reply) 21:39, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
• After two years, there is still exponentially more interest in the television series than any other topic, on Wikipedia as well as Google. In addition, the disambiguation page makes no reference to pirates generally, so page view and search data contribute more to the discussion than your hypothetical reader. We're also talking about Black Sails, both words capitalized, a proper noun. Black sails can most certainly redirect to pirates. -- Wikipedical (talk) 18:35, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose Per above. The series is ending in three months, meaning that how current standing of the series' popularity stands really has no basis, as it will only stay that way for several more months before falling each and every year. Alex|The|Whovian? 23:37, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose If you look at Black Sails (disambiguation), you will see that there is also a 1999 EP called Black Sails. Therefore, the identifier "TV series" is actually necessary to distinguish this topic. TheVictor99 (talk) 12:40, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
• Support as per the reasons explained. --Nicola Romani (talk) 16:29, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
• Support --Max Tomos (talk) 17:39, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose. I can argue this both ways, but I think that Black Sails EP is naturally disambiguated (despite the cover art). The page stats are not a reliable indicator of primary topic, and the long term significance of the TV series is equally dubious. Andrewa (talk) 22:07, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
• Support. We only consider topics that are covered on Wikipedia, and here we only have this show, Black Sails EP, which doesn't appear notable, and a summit of the mountain Wetherlam that doesn't have its own article. No article appears to discuss or even mention "black sails" as a "general cultural trope associated with pirates", so that's a non-starter even if it's true. The show literally gets over 99% of the traffic[6] so it is easily the primary topic in terms of use. In terms of long-term significance, a TV series that ran for 4 years, got hundreds of thousands of viewers per episode,[7] and has generated coverage in a wide variety of reliable sources would seem to be more prominent over an EP for which reliable coverage doesn't appear forthcoming (I've nominated it for deletion).--Cúchullain t/c 17:30, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose Besides the television series, and the EP, the term is associated with pirates in general which should be included in the disambiguation list; and which predates either. DA1 (talk) 17:35, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Black Sails (TV series). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the `|checked=`, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting `|needhelp=` to your help request.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set `|needhelp=<your help request>` on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot 11:29, 21 July 2017 (UTC)