Jump to content

Talk:Jean-François de Galaup, comte de Lapérouse

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

La Pérouse name references

I repeat what I already said. For a scrupulous and thorough historian, the best, the most credible, the surest, almost the only way to know the true name of Jean-François de Galaup, comte de La Pérouse is to refer to the time when he was living and right after. A great many sources of this time exist in regard with the Navigator and prove that his name was 'La Pérouse' and no other. Would His Majesty the King LOUIS XVI who signed his Promotion as a Commodore, his wife, his sister Victoire, all his relatives, all who knew him have not known his true name and written it in a wrong way ? The spelling 'Lapérouse' appeared in 1839, officially, fifty years after his disappearing. So all efforts to legalize today the name 'Laperouse' as far as the navigator is concerned are lost time and of no value. Jacques Thomas (talk) 20:09, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well that is a reasonable argument, but as a counterexample from a comparable era, I would simply say, Wellesley or Wellington ?Eregli bob (talk) 15:41, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Isn't "comte de laperouse" a title, not a name ? If you have John Howard, Duke of Norfolk, or Gerald Grosvenor, Duke of Westminster, you might call him "Howard", or "Norfolk", but his name is Howard.Eregli bob (talk) 15:48, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Jacques Thomas (talk), I am a little disappointed to see that you have recently made inappropriate changes to the Jean-François de Galaup, comte de Lapérouse article. Please do not do that again, it creates unnecessary work undoing your edits and is quite counter productive. Please do not; re-name the subject of the article despite how strongly you feel about the matter, please also do not rename the title of cited articles, that destroys the encyclopaedic nature of the article and undermines one of the core integrity of a Wikipedia article, please also do not change the detail of a URL string in a citation as this breaks the link to the source requiring repair. Please also do not rename the source file for images used in the article as this also breaks the link the that image resulting in an error display. That sort of activity is generally considered to be vandalism and is not viewed as appropriate behaviour by a Wikipedia editor. I have already suggested that you might like to contribute to either a separate article on the origins of the name La Pérouse, Lapérouse, La Péyrouse and a descriptive and section within the main article to explain and de-mystify the contradictions, both historic and contemporary that surround the name. I have also made clear that such an exercise requires the provision of citable and credible sources to all information provided to the article. For example, if you wish to cite King LOUIS XVI who signed his Promotion as a Commodore then a cited source is required. As there is so much nonsense in the translations I would suggest that the actual document itself should be cited and an attempt made to secure rights to release the image under CC-BY-SA 3.0 Creative Commons license and then upload it to Wikimedia Commons. You may note that I have gone to some trouble to address your concerns with cited reference sources in the discussions (some now archived) above. Again I stress I am sympathetic with your concerns and your point of view but it must be understood that Wikipedia is an encyclopaedic resource, not a discussion venue, nor is it a place to effect change. That has to occurred elsewhere and then WP can describe that change in an appropriate article or in modifications to an existing one. If you want to rename a ship, talk to the navy. If you want the Maritime museum or other French government institutions to refer to Lapérouse as La Pérouse then you must take it up with them. If they change then the referenced material here changes to suit. You must not just change it yourself. If it is something that has already entered into the realm of history, such as a ship long since decommissioned then there is no way we can name that ship by any name other than the one it carried. I hope you understand and please do not do that to a WP article again or you may find the reaction of other WP editors is less understanding than my own. Felix (talk) 09:29, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

He signed his name Lapérouse that's why the Friends of the Lapérouse Museum (Sydney) use it - seen as header on Newsletters eg. http://laperousemuseum.files.wordpress.com/2008/06/vol-1-no-1-1990.pdf One of the founders of the Museum was a descendant. The head of the Laperouse family also uses one word Philipe de Lapérouse - this is a photo of him at the Museum http://laperousemuseum.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/web-with-laperouse.jpg and short bio http://www.highquestpartners.com/team/team-details-Philippe-de-Laperouse.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Botanybay1788 (talk • contribs) 00:16, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That is one example, but he might have used different spellings at different times. Compare Walter Raleigh, ref 2. A reason for contraction could be that "de La" looks like it might be an error for "de la". On the other hand, "de Pérouse" means "from Perugia" in Italy. There could be various reasons: compare Thomas de la Rue, who might have been mocked as "of(f) the street", and his evidently respectable son Warren De La Rue. (Please sign your posts.) Wikiain (talk) 04:25, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Jean-François de Galaup, comte de Lapérouse. 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.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:34, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Gold Finger Ring

I sent hand drawings of the ring from inside and outside to a few but non can interpret. I checked with designs of countries of letters etc but non matches.

Ring is said from Europe perhaps in late 1700 or later. I couldn't get a photo as late but ring now on another island in the Solomon Islands. Any interest I will send drawings. Thank you. Andrew Andrew Terence Tekirua (talk) 00:13, 26 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Did D'Entrecasteaux see smoke?

In May 1793, he arrived at the island of Vanikoro, which is part of the Santa Cruz group of islands (now part of the Solomon Islands). D'Entrecasteaux thought he saw smoke signals from several elevated areas on the island, but was unable to investigate due to the dangerous reefs surrounding the island and had to leave.


In reading thru this line I can't help but notice there is no citation. I did not see this referenced in the translation of Laibidierre's book. I can't connect to Duyker's article anymore either. Do we have a primary source citation at all that D'Entrecasteaux saw or thought he saw anything at Vanikoro?

Doubt it. Dunmore doesn't mention smoke signals in his 2006 biography of de la Perouse, and I'm sure he would have, given the clear implications that the smoke signals may have been from survivors - in fact, it seems they only saw Vanikoro at a distance and probably nowhere near enough to see smoke signals, let alone "dangerous reefs". I have rephrased and cited to Dunmore. Zawed (talk) 07:10, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:A000:122C:382:14C9:D32E:5DCC:14F (talk) 04:16, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't able to find any citation but I did find an offhand reference (without citation) by the author Alan Villiers who claimed he did see smoke. Now I'm totally baffled hownhebgot this info. See link

https://books.google.com/books/about/The_Coral_Sea.html?id=DpF_DQAAQBAJ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:A000:122C:382:2D3E:335:9735:BF2D (talk) 07:28, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That book was originally published in 1949 so won't reflect more recent scholarship. Also you have alluded, there are no specific citations so we can't verify the accuracy of any facts he presents. Zawed (talk) 08:12, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Redirects here

@WCCasey: In this edit, you removed the redirect template with the comment "a proper name doesn't "mean" anything else, so no need to disambig", but if you look at La_Perouse (redirected from Lapérouse (disambiguation)), you'll find that there are three ships and a restaurant named "Lapérouse". Seems like an appropriate use of the redirect template to me. --Macrakis (talk) 14:54, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Strangely arranged article

The "Epilogue" and "Fate" sections are out of order, and should probably be rearranged. Adpete (talk) 00:30, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Jean-François_de_Galaup,_comte_de_Lapérouse&oldid=1250065490"