A question about the playing style of Mikhail Tal

On the webpage that lists the chess games of Mikhail Tal on the chessgames website, it has a table of games played by Mikhail Tal and on that table it states what sacrifices appeared in that games list. People keep saying that the style of Tal was mostly sacrificial, yet there are plenty of games listed that do not list down any sacrifices within that table. Is it true that Tal did not make anywhere near as many sacrifices as people claim, or is it just the case that the sacrifices aren't listed because during a lot of his games when Tal did make sacrifices he simply got his pieces that he had sacrificed back, therefore they aren't listed as sacrifices because he gained the material back within so many moves within his games, simply because his opponents couldn't handle his sacrifices without giving up pieces in return?

No strong player makes sacrifices if there are simple, direct moves that are better. Tal's surprising sacrifices in well-known openings against the world's best players gave him a reputation for brilliant sacrificial play. It was particularly intriguing that opinion was often split as to whether the sacrifices were sound or not. For some of his games the question wasn't settled for decades later when computers became strong enough to solve them.

Tal's fame for "sacrificial brilliance" was a result of the genius of those sacrifices he did make rather than the number of sacrifices he played.

During the games when Tal didn't make any sacrifices how would you describe his style when he was world champion?

He always strove to attack and would take risks to get attacking chances. He said that once, when young, he played conservatively to get a draw that helped him in the tournament standings, but he realized it was "wrong" to do so--a player must always try for the victory.

So in other words Tal was a tactical genius who was a very aggressive player. The tacticsl genius and sheer aggression that Tal possessed always ends up being overshadowed by the sacrifices that he had done over the board.

Its not overshadowing really. I can't think of any other player who was able to succeed against top tier players by (on more than a few occasions, but not perhaps as many as you hoped for) throwing away material any better than Tal did. So in that sense, its a fair thing for him to be known for. 
But the famous hippo story, to me, sums up the sort of person you are talking about. His career was too long and varied, even if you discard some of the bad health years, to distill into a few words that describe a single 'style' that you can emulate or really talk about. But the core of that 'style' -- if you insist on doing it anyway -- was creativity. The sacs were a side effect of that.

You should keep in mind that all the elite players can win in any style: sacrificial attack, positional squeeze, or precise endgame play. Tal won many games in each style. When Tal was a young star he delighted in complex, double-edged positions. He had nerves of steel and great calculating ability. As he got older, he became more of a positional player, although he could still produce the occasional brilliancy. At one point he held the record for the most consecutive games without a loss