Talk:Pirate code

This article should be renamed "Pirate articles" or "Articles of piracy." At no time did the pirates refer to their articles as a "code"; the idea of a "code" comes from the movie Pirates of the Caribbean, not from history. Furthermore, the idea that these three sets of articles sprang from some original code invented jointly by Roberts and Morgan is impossible. Roberts was six years old when Morgan died. --Pirate Dan 04:23, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree somewhat with that, except the fact that Articles of Piracy and Pirate Articles are also related to official memoradums and laws passed regarding Piracy, maybe another title would be apropriate?--Sharz 12:32, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Movie don't say that the Code was invented By Henry Morgan and Bartholomew Roberts, it was only said thtit was made by the "Pirates Morgan and Bartholomew". However, Henry Morgan had two contemporary pirates named Bartholomew (Bartolomeo Portugues & Bartholomew Sharp) and a pirate called Kasper (or Casper) Morgan was active on Madagascar in the days of Roberts, so the Code could have been invented two real-life pirates with this names.

True, the actual movie line only says "Morgan and Bartholomew." The article has claimed that "Bartholomew" was Roberts and that "Morgan" was Henry since before I started editing it, but that may just be the supposition of the writer. Do the Pirates of the Caribbean books say anything more detailed about it?

You're right that Portugues and Sharp were both contemporaries of Morgan. On the other hand, I'm unfamiliar with this Casper/Kasper Morgan, and I don't see anything about any pirate with that name on the Net. But I'd agree to changing the article to reflect the possibility that the movie is referring to Portugues or Sharp. Pirate Dan 13:38, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merging pages

I would advocate keeping two separate pages, with Pirate code of the Brethren being devoted to the fictional code of Pirates of the Caribbean, and the historical pirate articles being moved over to, and integrated with, the Articles of Agreement page. The current arrangement of referring to real articles by a fictional name is awkward and potentially confusing. Pirate Dan 13:38, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry to say that I'm very much in favour of merging these two articles, in this way more can be added to a central article. Beyond this, it would be easier to explain the differance to responders, rather than having two conflicting articles, you would have one that flowed. If you don't object to this reasoning I will conduct the merge. --Sharz 23:41, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a life and death issue, so far as I'm concerned. I think we can make the articles good whether they're merged or separate. I have no objection to your proceeding to the merge. Pirate Dan 02:03, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]