Talk:Jean-François de Galaup, comte de Lapérouse/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 2

LP's death

Did anyone confirm how La Perouse died in 1828?

News is being bruited about that La Bousolle has only just been found, rather than in 1964 as is mentioned in this article. See, for example http://edition.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/asiapcf/05/10/laperouse.wrecked/

It's worth noting that the details here jibe with the details in the article (notably, the placement of the wreck off the island of Vanikoro in the Solomons). I suspect it's just a case of the media misunderstanding the story, and that this was just an expedition to recover some of the already-known wreck. Can anyone shed any light on this?

CNN are confused. The Hakluyt society's edition of La Pérouse's journals (published in 1995) give a brief history of the searches that have been carried out over the years, and they record a visit by the French patrol boat Dunkerquoise in 1964, to bring some items to the surface. The French mapped the sites of other items, and it seems to have been a regular habit of the French Navy to periodically send expeditions to Vanikoro to recover items and check on the state of the monuments: this report is about the results from the latest of them.

Conférence de presse Expédition Vanikoro 2005

Ecb 19:39, May 12, 2005 (UTC)

As to the question above, on how La Pérouse died: He is presumed to have died in 1788, not 1828, and no one knows how he died -- whether it was in the initial wreck off the coast of Vanikoro, or whether he survived the wreck & was then killed or died on the island, or if he was one of the survivors who sailed off in a boat the survivors allegedly made from pieces of the wreckage. Primula (talk) 03:37, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Which ship was de Langle captain of?

As I was going through and referencing this article, I noticed that, when discussing the death of de Langle, one of the officers on the expedition, it claimed he was the captain of the Astrolabe. My source (Novaresio, Paolo (1996). The Explorers) claimed he was captain of the Boussole, the other ship. I changed this in the article(as I felt a sourced fact superceeds an unsourced one) but I suspect it may be a controversial or unknown point, so further reasearch would be appreciated. Thanks! JesseW 22:12, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

After looking into my copy of La Pérouse's journals (see the comment above), I'm sure that de Langle was captain of L'Astrolabe until his death, although he was promoted afterwards (odd though that might seem!). Here's the source, for future reference.

Appendix II of volume 2 of "The Journal of Jean-François de Galaup de la Pérouse, 1785–1788" (ISBN 0904180395) gives the muster rolls of the two ships. It includes all the various promotions that occurred on the voyage, and shows that:

  • La Pérouse was 'Capitaine de Vaisseau' of La Boussole (as well as holding other ranks).
  • de Langle was 'Capitaine de Vaisseau' of L'Astrolabe until he died on 11 December 1787.
  • de Langle was promoted to 'Chef de Division' on 14 April 1788.
  • L'Astrolabe's Lieutenant, (Anne-Georges-Augustin de Monty) was promoted to 'Capitaine de Vaisseau' of L'Astrolabe on 14 April 1788.

Perhaps your source mistakenly assumed that de Langle's promotion in April 1788 was to the captaincy of La Boussole.

Reading between the lines, it appears that ranks were assigned back in France, on the basis of comments by officers sent from foreign ports (Manila, Macao & Kamchatka). Dispatches took months, perhaps years, to get back. In de Langle's case, he was promoted in April 1788 because La Pérouse had sent back favourable comments about him and because France hadn't heard of his death: the first news of it was carried from Port Jackson to France by four of the redundant transport ships of the First Fleet, all of which set sail in July 1788.

Ecb 19:37, August 16, 2005 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the vote was move. David Kernow 21:01, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Requested move

Jean-François de Galaup, count de La Pérouse → Jean-François de Galaup, comte de La Pérouse : Consistent use of French; more accurate.

Voting

Please add  * Support  or  * Oppose  followed by a brief explanation, then sign your vote using "~~~~"

  • Support : For the sake of consistency; the first line of the article could then link "comte" with "count" thus: Jean-François de Galaup, comte (count) de La Pérouse, ... —the preceding unsigned comment is by David Kernow (talk • contribs) 11:15, 23 January 2006 (UTC+11 hours ) (Nominator of move)
  • Support : It's slightly jarring to come across the anglicised term count in the middle of a French name.Ecb 19:49, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Support as per comments above--A Y Arktos 20:42, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Support I normally would opt for english names, but it does sound a tad bit odd in this case. Gryffindor 03:43, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Footnote overkill?

Bearing in mind it's an article in a general encyclopedia, anyone else feel this article suffers from footnote overkill? I suggest a single acknowledgement of the Novaresio book suffices, perhaps under a "Sources" heading. I wouldn't delete the work done to detail the references, however; I'd transfer it to a subpage. What do people think?
Thanks, David Kernow 11:25, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

I think you've got a point. I, too, am unhappy to discard the obviously painstaking work by JesseW, but I think we'll have to.
Firstly, earlier edits to the article record that much of the information on it is from André Engels' book and website (the website is still linked in the section headed "See also" of the article). We're doing Engels a disservice by paraphrasing his work then quoting Novaresi as the primary source for our Wikipedia article.
Secondly (this is a personal view) I was taught that footnotes are there to give extra, supporting information to the reader when s/he reads a sentence and thinks, "That can't be right!" or "where did they get that idea from?". The footnotes on this article are to fairly trivial items, such as La Pérouse's date of birth, names of his exploration ships, the fact that the Prévosts were uncle and nephew. What researcher with access to a decent academic library would have doubts about them?
With apologies to JesseW, I say we delete the footnotes and put in a reference to Novaresio's book under the heading "see also". Ecb 20:42, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Trivia

It is stated in the french wiki ("Exécution de Louis XVI" under wiki-fr) that among the last words of Louis XVI prior to his execution (21 January 1793) was a question to a naval officer inquiring of any news of the La Pérouse expedition. Anyone have any info regarding this? -- Mille Sabord

It may be apocryphal, but many sources on La Pérouse and Louis XVI mention this. He (the about-to-be-beheaded king) is supposed to have said "A-t-on des nouvelles de M. de la Pérouse?" ("Is there any news of Mr. La Pérouse?"). Louis XVI did take a strong personal interest in the expedition, but it's hard to believe this is what was on his mind as he climbed up the scaffold. Primula (talk) 03:43, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Details of PacNW Coast visit to be added

I don't have time at the moment, but there are details concerning La Perouse's visit to Nootka Sound and the rest of the NW Coast in Derek Pethick's books on the marine exploration/fur trade in that area; a mountain on one of the Queen Charlotte Islands is also named for him; I'll get its location refs and be back later.Skookum1 17:47, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Spelling

It seems there is spelling mistakes in this article:

1) "Lapérouse" in word word instead of "La Pérouse" in two words (as it should be it seems)

2) "Galaup" instead of "Galoup"

can somebody fix it ? the 2nd mistake is in the article title even ...

--OC 08:24, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Two picture captions wrong, it seems; I'll correct them. The only "Galoup" is in "See also", where it echoes the spelling in the title but not the body of the text it links to. "Galaup" seems correct (I've just checked other encyclopedias etc.).qp10qp 22:42, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Is his original name "Jean-François Galaup" or "Jean-François de Galaup"? The title of the article includes the "de", but the text just calls him "Jean-François Galaup". JackofOz 04:40, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

ADB and other refs say "de Galaup". I'll correct the text. JackofOz 02:53, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

There's quite a bit of disagreement/variation in the spelling of La Pérouse's name. Galaup, however, is spelled Galaup in nearly every source I've ever looked at. La Pérouse's given name at birth was Jean-François de Galaup. I believe the nobiliary "de" had been in the family for several generations by the time he was born.

"La Pérouse" is a different matter. There's a long discussion of this question in John Dunmore's introduction to his translation of the La Pérouse journals (Hakluyt Society 1995, see pages xi-xiv). Briefly: The "de la Pérouse" was added to his name when he joined the navy, to make him sound more aristocratic. Official documents during his lifetime always use 2 words for the name. La Pérouse himself always signed his name "Laperouse," not even bothering with the accent mark, but his writing tended to be not terribly scrupulous about such things, and he often elided words with their articles (e.g., "leurope," "lamerique"). After his disappearance, his surviving sisters petitioned for the use of his name for themselves and their heirs. Permission was granted in 1815, but the name was misspelled "La Peyrouse," with a "y." The spelling was officially "fixed" in 1839, but now it was rendered one word: Lapérouse. Modern-day Lapérouses all spell their name this way. La Pérouse scholars have gone both ways. The important thing, I think, is consistency. Primula (talk) 04:00, 14 July 2008 (UTC) The "ey" in La Peyrouse is just another way, and probably a better way, of representing the "é" in La Pérouse. It's probably a better way because the accent above the "e", which makes it a different letter in French with a different pronunciation and meaning, "é", tends to get left off in English writings. (Kattigara)

Too casual

Where is the evidence that a masscre occurred?GhostofSuperslum 14:15, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

I changed the tag from NPOV to verify source. It is one statement that requires verification not the whole article that is NPOV. This is more appropriate. SauliH 21:44, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

On what precise date, and exactly where, did his fleet turn up in Australia?

Here it says he arrived at Botany Bay on 26 January 1788.

History of Australia (1788–1850) says: "26 January 1788 was also the date that the French expedition of two ships led by Admiral Jean-François de La Pérouse arrived off Botany Bay and Sydney Cove."

  • Not sure how a fleet could arrive off 2 places simultaneously, unless one ship arrived at Botany Bay and the other ship arrived at Sydney Cove.

First Fleet says: "[Phillip's] party returned [to Botany Bay from Port Jackson] on 23 January. The party was startled when two French ships came into sight and entered Botany Bay. This turned out to be a scientific expedition led by Jean-François de La Pérouse. The French group remained until 10 March ....".

  • That suggests they first encountered each other at Botany Bay, two or three days before 26 January.

So, it's not clear to me exactly where they first encountered the British, or exactly when. Did they first meet at Botany Bay on c. 23 January and then follow the British up to Sydney Cove, where they remained for some time; or did they first meet at Sydney Cove on 26 January? -- JackofOz (talk) 04:29, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

I have the answer. David Hill's 1788: The Brutal Truth of the First Fleet says that La Perouse's 2 ships were first sighted outside Botany Bay on 24 January. They couldn't enter the bay because of a tremendous gale, which also prevented the British from getting out. On 25 January the Supply, carrying Phillip, managed to make its way of the bay and up to Sydney Cove. Phillip saw the French ships but decided to ignore them until the whole English fleet had moved to Sydney Cove. Phillip and the crew of the Supply were the only ones at the flag raising ceremony and the formal proclamation at Sydney Cove on 26 January. That day, John Hunter, still back at Botany Bay, made contact with Captain de Clonard of La Perouse's fleet. Later that day the Sirius made it out of Botany Bay, followed by the remaining ships. On 1 February, Phillip asked Lieutenant King to pay a courtesy call on La Perouse, still anchored in Botany Bay. He met La Perouse on 2 February, and was informed that some convicts had already made their way overland from Port Jackson to Botany Bay in order to come aboard the French ships and escape, but were refused entry. King remained with La Perouse till 5 February, and was treated with great cordiality. There was a little more contact between the British and the French from then on, but Phillip was too busy with setting things up at Sydney Cove to personally get involved. Hunter was one person who paid them another visit, at the beginning of March. While Hunter was travelling down by land to Botany Bay, Captain de Clonard was sailing by boat up to Sydney Cove to deliver some dispatches to be taken to the French ambassador by the first available ship leaving Sydney Cove for England. Within 2 weeks of this, La Perouse and his ships left Botany Bay and were never seen again. So, the French fleet never went anywhere near Sydney Cove, and the only French sailor who visited it was Captain de Clonard in early March. -- JackofOz (talk) 08:06, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Requested move

Having posted the information on suitable naming conventions for this article for over one month with only one comment (in the negative) I still do not feel it is appropriate to move without making the matter known. This naming convention has some controversial aspects to it as some are strident about conforming to a naming tradition that is contrary to the bulk of French references. This seems to be a view held particularly strongly by a New Zealand scholar who has done translation work and authored articles on the subject of Lapérouse. However his views do not seem to be supported by any significant French institution, indeed the contrary is the case. Accordingly I proposed the Article is moved (re-named). My reasons and appropriate ref's are detailed on the Discussion page as is a response from ( Ecb (talk) 22:16, 14 June 2010 (UTC)), and a reply to that response with further clarifying detail.Felix505 (talk) 13:43, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Feel free to re-request on the issue of the capitilization of 'comte' (no consensus on that was found in this discussion). Regards, Arbitrarily0 (talk) 20:12, 23 July 2010 (UTC)


Jean-François de Galaup, comte de La Pérouse → Jean-François de Galaup comte de Lapérouse — The current naming is entirely at odds with the French Navy and their official biography of Lapérouse and the naming of a The French Cruiser Laperouse, c.1898 and a (currently serving) hydrographic survey ship (Bâtiment hydrographique) Lapérouse A791, the Ministère de la défense (French Ministry of Defence) documentation on Lapérouse and his voyages including recent publications, the French Ministry of Culture and other significant French bodies including the maritime museum (The Musée National de la Marine) and the Lapérouse Museum. Comprehensive detail is available on the articles Discussion page under the heading "Jean-François de Galaup comte de Lapérouse -or- Jean-François de Galaup, comte de La Pérouse" . Felix505 (talk) 13:43, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

  • Oppose While I appreciate that the French may refer to him as Lapérouse we are guided by what he is commonly known as in English. It's worth noting however, that French Wikipedia has him at La Pérouse and that the French sources cited on that article are mixed between La Pérouse and Lapérouse. It appears that the French haven't yet reached universal agreement on the form of the name. Many of the citations on the English article are Australian, and it appears that they all use La Pérouse or La Perouse. Better to leave just where it is. However, shouldn't it be Jean-François de Galaup, Comte de La Pérouse? Surely the comte is part of a title and therefore should be capitalised? Skinsmoke (talk) 21:09, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

-Skinsmoke- I must disagree that the Australian usage is La Perouse, in fact the opposite seems to be the case. For example the Australian government normally uses "Lapérouse" in publications, ie <http://www.collectionsaustralia.net/org/98/about>. Also have a look at the migration museum, powerhouse museum, and nsw dept of the environment, they use "Lapérouse". <http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/nationalparks/parkhome.aspx?id=N0066> and <http://www.migrationheritage.nsw.gov.au/online-exhibitions/>. We should not be confused by references to the suburb of La Perouse in Sydney either on maps or in articles as that spelling is of course going to be used in that instance. I have noted extensive use of Lapérouse in Australian reference materials and museums in that country seem to be using Lapérouse as well. I think the Australian maritime museum normally uses Lapérouse as well, except of course when they are referring to the suburb. Another example is the Lapérouse Museum in Sydney, (it is described as "Laperouse Museum, end of Anzac Parade, La Perouse, Sydney, NSW 2036") <http://www.marineartistsaustralia.com.au/index.htm As for the capital "C" (Compte) I have noted that French sources including the French navy do not use that so maybe we should not start using it here. They use " Jean-François de Galaup, comte de Lapérouse". If you have a look at who has done the editing on the French WP La Perouse article you may note that it appears to have had some influence from two editors who may have a bit of a paradigm mindset about this. see <fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utilisateur:Jacques_Thomas> Jacques Thomas appears to be quite strident about this matter and yet the information he gives to support his assertions (such as his standpoint being supported by the Ministry of Culture) appear to conflict with the facts . The French Minstry of Culture apparently do not support his views and have made this clear. Indeed the French WP needs attention as well as it is at odds with the facts.

However the important issue here is that the man was a Frenchman and an important figure in the 'Age of Enlightenment' as well as being a highly significant figure in French naval and maritime history. This article should not be referring to the man as anything other than Lapérouse as that is the accepted and officially recognised formatting of his name used by the French Government, the French Navy and the French Ministry of Culture. I have even seen photos on an English language website showing the French naval ship Lapérouse with it's name displayed on the ship but then referring to it as this commissioned French Naval Ship as the "La Perouse" despite the correct name being clearly visible in the photo. This is a bit linguistically presumptious I think. My primary concern is that by having Wikipedia use an incorrect name it then perpetuates the error and allows it to propagate further. Surely the ultimate authority here should be the French Ministry of Culture, the French Navy, the French Museums and the mans own family, not Wikipedia editors such as ourselves. WP should be accurate and authoritative. The accuracy here is in question The authoritative aspect should be answered by referring to authoritative sources, the obvious authoritative sources are surely those represented by significant institutions of the French government and the nations historic and cultural bodies, not by citing sources that are influenced by other factors. I would hope the French would not rename Capt Cook 'Capitaine Lacuisinier' so lets try and get the name of a significant French historical figure correctly described in this article. Felix505 (talk) 15:28, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

  • Comment I understand your frustration on this one. As I understand it, the problem is largely caused because the French changed the spelling of the family name after his death. However, it doesn't matter how much you shout, you have not presented sufficient evidence that the name of the man in common use in English is Lapérouse. The article has five citations with online links remaining accessible. Four of these use La Pérouse; one uses Lapérouse. Furthermore, the article on French Wikipedia uses La Pérouse. Of the four accessible citations linked from French Wikipedia, all use La Pérouse. The work published by the man is published under La Pérouse. It is worth noting that the man himself never used Lapérouse. This sort of confusion is inevitable when spelling is changed by governments after the death of the person. However, on Wikipedia we do not blindly follow the whims of governments, French or otherwise. Until you can demonstrate that common use in English has changed, the article stays exactly where it is, as we report usage rather than establishing it. Skinsmoke (talk) 17:20, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Additional Comment Your point on Comte/comte is relevant to the French language. It is customary in French not to capitalise titles, even when they are used as a proper noun (as in a formal title such as Duke of Edinburgh). In English we follow the opposite practice, and capitalise when in a formal title. We are writing in English, even though it may be a former French title that we are writing about. For example, we would write of the Duke of Orléans or King Philip VI, whereas in French they would refer to le duc d'Orléans or le roi Philippe VI. Skinsmoke (talk) 17:31, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
Response to [Skinsmoke]: I hope it does not really appear I am shouting, I am rather trying to state with a sufficient volume of evidence that the name usage is in error. The details are explained in some detail in the section above with appropriate links and refs.
  • Firstly I disagree with the notion that "common" English usage is La Perouse and that WP should therefore follow this. I have noticed that authoritive En language sources such as museums, recent academic articles and exhibition titles are using Laperouse. Many museums and similar dedicated to his name in English speaking countries such as australia canada and others in none English speaking countries including in Albi France, his place of origin.. ie 2000 University of Toronto- <http://www.biographi.ca/009004-119.01-e.php?BioId=36018> University of Sydney, Scott Ernest- <http://setis.library.usyd.edu.au/ozlit/pdf/p00042.pdf> see also <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernest_Scott>.
  • Personal use-Jean-François de Galaup comte de Lapérouse did use "Lapérouse", that is how he 'signed his name, where as he often wrote "...La Perouse" when writing a description of himself (yes confusing). His family apparently tried to clear the matter up a long time ago and they currently use "Lapérouse".
  • I don't think we should dwell to much on articles cited in the current WP article, in either EN or FR, that there is a bias or misunderstanding prevailing in those articles is part of my original point. If you have a read through the section of this discussion page above (Jean-François de Galaup comte de Lapérouse -or- Jean-François de Galaup, comte de La Pérouse) you will see there are plenty of alternative and highly authoritative citations to support "Jean-François de Galaup comte de Lapérouse". Of the URL linked citataions on the existing WP page one of them takes us to Britannica which in turn cited John Dunmore who is a NZ academic with some firm ideas on naming conventions of Lapérouse that appear to seriously conflict with mainstream French authoritative sources as well as many EN language academic and museum sources. Following the Britanica links further I arrive at "Allen, Edward Webber. The Vanishing Frenchman: The Mysterious Disappearance of Lapérouse (Rutland, Vermont: C.D. Tuttle, Co., 1959)" and "Inglis, Robin. The Lost Voyage of Lapérouse (Vancouver Maritime Museum, 1986)." I think this WP citation is in error in that it refers to Britannica rather than examining and referencing the sources that Britannica cites.
  • Upon further exploration of the cited links I came across <http://www.siskiyous.edu/shasta/bib/B4.htm>. That page is filled with rererences to Lapérouse both in translations to English and citation of original French document sources spanning many decades. This extensive english language bibliography cites (7) references to La Perouse and (100) to Lapérouse. So when the citing of that article is critically examined it also reveals itself to be in error. Good example of a circular paradigm at work here I think.
Of the URL citations on the current WP article and in response to [Skinsmoke]s comment that "Of the four accessible citations linked from French Wikipedia, all use La Pérouse":
  • citation#13. Britannica-Cites an article that uses "La Perouse": Cites John Dunmore who is a NZ academic with some firm ideas on naming conventions of Lapérouse that appear to seriously conflict with mainstream French authoritative sources as well as many EN language academic and museum sources
  • citation#17. Mixed use: ABC Bookworld, cites Dunmore but also two other publications using Laperouse, this is a secondary source and not a bibliography nor is it an authoritative primary source.
  • citation #18. Non-authoritative article on a Canadian Real Estate agents website, uses La Perouse: "SECHELT, BC, April 14, 2008, Local real estate agent Gary Little has written the following article as a memorial to the 220th anniversary of the death of French explorer Jean-François de Galaup, Comte de La Pérouse who surveyed the coast of British Columbia in 1786 as part of a scientific exploration of the Pacific Ocean." A Real Estate agents website-Not an 'authoritative article and although having citations to a commemorative stamp and some maps it lacks formal citations to the text. It is an sincere and well written piece by a Canadian amateur historian.
  • citation#19. Authoritative source uses Laperouse: Mount Shasta Annotated Bibliography Chapter 4 Early Exploration: Lapérouse Expedition, 1786 (7) references to La Perouse and (100) references to Lapérouse (by word search on page).
  • citation#29. Authoritative source-uses Lapérouse: Robert J. King, "What brought Lapérouse to Botany Bay?", Journal of the Royal Australian Historical Society, vol.85, pt.2, December 1999, pp.140-147
  • citation#33. Uses La Perouse: A very brief ABC australia online news article titled-"La Perouse wreck identified in Solomon Is". They are reporting on Vanikoro 2005, a multidisciplinary expedition of scientists embarked aboard Jacques Cartier, a French naval vessel supporting a multi-discipline scientific team to investigate the «mystery of Lapérouse» Also reported by the Guardian Weekly 'What news of Lapérouse?'. One of France's greatest maritime mysteries is slowly yielding up its secrets, Claudine Wéry Guardian Weekly, Friday 8 April 2005.<http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardian/2005/apr/08/guardianweekly.guardianweekly11>The mission was called "Opération VANIKORO-Sur les traces des épaves de LAPEROUSE".
  • Further to this I feel a little uncomfortable with the idea that as WP editors we should be 'translating' a name. Hence my attempt at irony with the comments about renaming Captain Cook = 'Capitaine Lacuisinier'. Fine maybe to capitalise elements of the En 'interpretation' of the name but not the actual name itself. That is indeed in part of my my disagreement. We appear to be renaming the person in a manner that is out of accord with the correct name as described by the majority of authoritative sources. Repeating errors just because they have been established on WP is not appropriate if that is what is occurring here. My point is that the WP articles (EN and FR) are in error if we examine a sufficient body of material, including current (formalised) English usage by academic, government and historical instututions both in both French and English speaking societies as well as an overwhelming body of common French usage.
  • I note that the WP article on the French Naval Cruiser named after Lapérouse is described by WP as "Lapérouse". So we cannot rename the ship on WP but we are renaming the man that the ship is named after. Also <Wikipedia:Canadian wikipedians' notice board/Dictionary of Canadian Biography/G> uses Lapérouse.
  • The current serving Naval ship is also called Lapérouse this is also described in a WP article.
  • In any case I thought we concentrated on 'authoritative sources' on WP rather than trying to evaluate "common" usage which is also somewhat difficult to quantify. Felix505 (talk) 07:18, 18 July 2010 (UTC).
  • Support You are partly right, partly wrong in your last point. The relevant section at Wikipedia:Article titles states: Articles are normally titled using the most common English-language name of the subject of the article. In determining what this name is, we follow the usage of reliable sources, such as those used as references for the article. Article titles should be neither vulgar nor pedantic. Common usage in reliable sources is preferred to technically correct but rarer forms, whether the official name, the scientific name, the birth name, the original name or the trademarked name. In other words we use the common name cited in reliable sources. In any case, with the additional work you have done, and the explanations given, particularly about the citations shown on the French Wikipedia page (ironic, isn't it, that the French should have to cite a New Zealander writing in English, when writing about one of their own?), I am happy to go along with a move to Jean-François de Galaup, Comte de Lapérouse, and have dropped my objection (I still think we need to capitalise Comte when writing in English, as the phrase collectively forms a proper noun). Skinsmoke (talk) 15:40, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Support s:The_Life_of_Captain_Matthew_Flinders,_R.N./Index#488 Lapérouse. 1914 pre-eminent Australian resource. Truth be known, if we went off Australian resource material the article would be at Lapérouse alone, no one uses the full name. billinghurst sDrewth 15:14, 23 July 2010 (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. No further edits should be made to this section.

Jean-François de Galaup comte de Lapérouse -or- Jean-François de Galaup, comte de La Pérouse

I come to this discussion page as an outcome of a wikitravel edit.

When setting about editing the wikitravel entries on the locality of La Perouse (sic) in Sydney, New South Wales, Australia I found a link on that page to the the Wikipedia article on the suburb of La Perouse in Sydney. That page subsequently linked to the Jean-François de Galaup, comte de La Pérouse article.

I query the spelling of the mans name. I am concerned that this is an anomaly first established by scholars of the past anglicising the spelling of his name. Most of the french language ( and many of the english) sources I can turn up on web searches spell it Lapérouse and I understand he also signed his name in that way. Confusingly [1] Lapérouse described himself at the top of a private letter of 3 july 1783 as "M. De La Perouse" (It may be De LaPerouse but there appears to be a space between La and Perouse). However he then appears to sign the letter at the bottom as "Laperouse".

I have read that some (french) naval records use the spelling La Perouse but I have not been able to locate any. Again I suspect the writers concerned may have anglicising the spelling of his name.

There is a live link on the La Perouse suburb Wikipedia page that describes "Jean-François de Galaup, comte de La Pérouse" (a link to this WP article). I consider that this may put both the La Perouse (the suburb in sydney) Wikipedia article and the Jean-François de Galaup, comte de La Pérouse (the man) Wikipedia article at odds to the correct spelling of the name.

Most importantly I note that the The Musée National de la Marine [2] refers to him as "Jean-François de Galaup comte de Lapérouse". I think that source is more credible than either historic or contemporary scholarly papers and articles that are dealing with the subject by way of translations of text and other content.

There are many journals and other texts that refer to him as Lapérouse, including many French language publications, including also french/canadian. A NSW state library search for Lapérouse [3] a very quick count turns up 25 of the 67 hits as using the La Perouse spelling or other variations. The bulk of these La-Parouse entries appear to be titled to translated works. This leaves the overwhelming majority of 42 articles as having the spelling Lapérouse in the titles. It is of note that in most cases they appear to be the french publications that use Lapérouse and the english language or translated works that use La Perouse.

Obviously if a search is done for La Perouse the documents concerning the suburb of La Perouse then come into play and make it too confusing to sort out the background noise.. also: La Tragique Expédition de Lapérouse et Langle by Paul Fleuriot de Langle (1954). Jean-François de Galaup, Comte de LaPérouse, Dictionary of Canadian Biography IV, 282-83. also: A commemorative stamp depicting French explorer Jean Francois de Galaup is in the 1988 French series honoring explorers and navigators, author: Thompson, Jo-Ann, Publisher: American Publishing Company of New York, Publication Name: Stamps, Subject: Hobbies and crafts, ISSN: 0038-9358, Year: 1993 [4] describes "2.00+.50f featuring the explorers bust and a map of his explorations described "La Perouse".

I have edited the Wikitravel page to reflect the name - Jean-François de Galaup comte de Lapérouse - as I believe I have found a sufficient enough body of information to do that withinn the Wikitravel sites less rigid guidlines. As this site represents a more 'encyclodedic' regime I feel compelled to commit this edit and re-name suggestion to debate and scrutiny. Jean-François de Galaup comte de Lapérouse is a significant person of the Age of Enlightenment and a significant person of interest to the early history of australia and the exploration of Terra Australis and the South Pacific.

I think he deserves to have his name spelt correctly. I feel that the man himself was probably the best authority on the spelling of his own name most especially as apparently he suffixed it in this manner himself, The de Lapérouse suffix was apparently added by Jean-François de Galaup himself.

It seems we may be dealing with a historical inaccuracy arising from early anglicising of Jean-François de Galaup comte de Lapérouse's name.

I would appreciate other editors opinions and views on this before I rush in and make suitable changes to both the articles name and the content.Felix505 (talk) 04:29, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

I recommend that you don't be concerned about ambiguity and don't make changes to the names. The ambiguity about whether the name ought to be Lapérouse or La Pérouse is definitely not "an anomaly first established by scholars of the past anglicising the spelling of his name". The French are just as unsure of it as us anglophones.
As evidence, I present the existence of a scholarly aricle titled Lapérouse ou La Pérouse: légitimité d'une orthographe, in Nouvelle Revue maritime, Nos 2129-408 (January–February 1988), pp. 58–62. I have to confess I haven't read it, I've just quoted the reference from a footnote of John Dunmore's English translation of La Pérouse's journals (published by the Hakluyt Society in 1994, full references are in my earlier entries in this talk page).
In the introduction to the translation, Dunmore wrote a 4-page treatise titled "The Choice of a Name". It weighed the reasons in favour of 'La Pérouse' against the reasons in favour of 'Lapérouse'. Dunmore came down on the side of 'La Pérouse'. It convinced me, as it did User:Primula, who refers to it in an earlier discussion on the same subject on this page (14 July 2008, see above). If you like, I will scan & OCR those pages & put them up here for a few months so you can read that short section for yourself.
I recommend that you to take a look at Dunmore's wikipedia page; you can see from it that he's not some monoglot Anglophone in an ivory tower who wrote a book about La Pérouse for the kudos, but someone who has gone far along the same path that you have started out on.
My own thinking is that it ought to be 'La Pérouse', on the—purely sentimental—grounds that the French navy gave the name 'La Pérouse' to a 19th century warship and a 20th century scientific survey ship. If there's one type of organisation that's likely to have a good handle on how to honour one of their own who died in tragic circumstances, it's a nation's navy.
Don't worry too much about his habit of signing his name Laperouse. He had a habit of omitting spaces and apostrophes when he wrote, and frequently wrote the surname of his second in command (Fleuriot de Langle, with the space unquestionably present) as 'delangle'.
I suggest you mull over what I've written, and if you're sufficiently interested get hold of La Pérouse's journals yourself, take up my offer to post the relevant pages from Dunmore's translation or read through User:Primula's summary above. Then raise a call for Wikipedia:Requested moves. I think it only fair to say I'll vote against.
Cheers, Ecb (talk) 22:16, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you Ecb for your considered response to my appeal for examination of the formatting of La Pérouse/LaPérouse/Lapérouse. I am not suggesting the anomaly has arisen only from anglicising early translations. It seems the confusion is a lot more generalised over both time and language. I have read that the French 'modernised' or just changed the name over time. I have read that Lapérouse indicated some ambiguity himself. I also have read that the French navy currently uses and has previously used La Pérouse. You have alluded to that yourself with a document reference.

When I started looking into this matter earlier I found many statements were unsupported when I did some digging of my own. I have unfortunately since deleted my browsing histories on my investigations at that time but I do recall that on that occasion if I did a search and found either a historic document or a contemporary one that was in the English language, translated from the French I found name La Pérouse. If I then did a search for the original French language document I often found Lapérouse. This may indicate some tranlation errrors or simply a desire for unifomity by some English language scolars and researchers toward La Perouse and to Lapérouse by the French. Pity though to just ignore the French name treatment especially when it is coming from authoritative sources such as the French Navy and the Ministry of Culture.. There is no doubt in my mind though that many French texts have recently gone about some revisionism. Indeed changing La Pérouse to Lapérouse, or alternatively Lapérouse to La Pérouse. It all certainly adds to the confusion.

If looking at the The Musée National de la Marine [5] refers to him as "Jean-François de Galaup comte de Lapérouse". I think this French national institution must be given some credibility in their naming treatment of a significant national figure and representative of the French influence upon the 'Age of Enlightenment'. Additionally I see many comments about the French navy using La Pérouse as opposed to Lapérouse, but do not find any strong evidence of that actually happening.

When the matter is investigated I note the contrary The French Navy when naming the ship Lapérouse (A 791) have not used La Pérouse but have indeed used Lapérouse. It is often stated that they have not done this however that is clearly an error as both the French Navy and the Ministry of Defence are quite clear on this. It also appears to be painted on the ship.

Below is a description of that vessel: (Le bâtiment hydrographique de deuxième classe (BH) Lapérouse a été construit par la Direction des Constructions Navales à Lorient.), Sur cale le 11 juin 1985, Lancé le 14 novembre 1986. Mis au service actif le 20 avril 1988. So a French naval ship in current service carries the name "Lapérouse". Au sein de la flotte du Service Hydrographique et Océanographique de la Marine (SHOM). Depuis sa mise en service, le Lapérouse est basé à Brest." Fittingly the ship is tasked to hydro_oceanographique research and based at Brest.

This link <http://www.defense.gouv.fr/marine/decouverte/equipements/batiments_de_soutien/batiments/hydro_oceanographique/laperouse_a_791> goes to the ministry of defence publication on the ship Bâtiment hydrographique Lapérouse A791. The above is a publication of Site officiel de la marine nationale. It describes the ship, its colours (Fanion) and coat of arms (Tape de bouche) stating "Lapérouse", and gives what appears to be an official account of the history of the French naval officer Lapérouse published by the Navy. (Biographie de Jean-François de Galaup, comte de Lapérouse (1741-1788)) and a history of his voyages of discovery, (L'expédition de Lapérouse). This ship named is also fully described in the document available at <http://www.defense.gouv.fr/marine/content/download/44385/442990/file/Laperouse%20A791.pdf> This documentation somewhat contradicts a lot of the commentary I have seen about on the web stating that the French navy refer to the man as something other than Lapérouse. Simply put this is not so, the French Navy are referring to him as Lapérouse in both historical accounts and back in 1985 they named a ship after him, using the spelling Lapérouse. As he was a serving officer of some distinction in the French Navy I think we should accord some credibility to the official publications and naming protocols of the French Navy.

A search of <http://www.defense.gouv.fr/marine/dicodsearch/dicodadvancedsearch> all articles (marine) will turn up many Defence ministry and naval docs pertaining to Lapérouse (30) and La pérouse(15)

Also the Ministère de la défense (French Ministry of Defence) <http://jdb.marine.defense.gouv.fr/batiment/lpo>describes BH Lapérouse, "Le bâtiment hydrographique de deuxième classe (BH) Lapérouse a été construit par la Direction des Constructions Navales à Lorient. Also <http://jdb.marine.defense.gouv.fr/tag/Lapérouse> Journaux de bord : Marine nationale Recherche Keyword "Lapérouse" 18 matches on page.

Exposition Lapérouse is an exhibition copyrighted to the Copyright Ministère de la Défense, (French Ministry of the Defense) was held April 2 to June 26 2005 at the Mussée of Maritime history of Nouméa, exposition "Expedition Laperouse, The Road of the Echanges". Clearly they have called the man Lapérouse.

I note the NSW government publication on the subject of Lapérouse <http://www.migrationheritage.nsw.gov.au/exhibition/objectsthroughtime/laperouse/> uses the Lapérouse spelling. The authoritative source in this case being The Migration Heritage Centre at the Powerhouse Museum. The Powerhouse Museum in Sydney Australia is not a lightweight resource and should also be accorded some credibility in their research and diligence when handling such matters. However just to completely contradict this I note the cover illustration from Atlas du Voyage de La Pérouse used by the migration Heritage section uses the alternative spelling of La Pérouse. La Pérouse is a suburb in Sydney and http://www.migrationheritage.nsw.gov.au/exhibition/objectsthroughtime/stump/ has a significant place in the early colonial history of the Australian nation. This webpage holds some reasonable historic record concerning Lapérouse: [6]. It appears that the Australian sources including Museums and the Parks service have clearly attempted to clarify their spelling in a historic context.

Other sources: Musée Lapérouse Exposition temporaire consacrée à l’expédition TARA ARCTIC au Musée Lapérouse du 11 juin au 19 septembre 2010

Mystery of the disapearance of Monsieur de Lapérouse : Vanikoro wreckage - Hypothetical visit of New Caledonia-Wreckage of Jean-François de Galaup, count de Lapérouse.<http://www.croixdusud.info/hist_eng/laperouse_eng.php>(croixdusud.info New Caledonia)

Association Lapérouse Albi-France Musée Lapérouse, square Botany Bay 41 rue Porta 81000 ALBI (France)

Un bref historique, de 1785 à nos jours, has 14 matches to the name Lapérouse in this official French Ministry of Defence document and none to La Pérouse. <http://www.defense.gouv.fr/marine/actualite_et_dossiers/expedition_vanikoro_2005/un_peu_d_histoire>

I refer also to the websites:

L’Association Lapérouse Albi France, a pour objectif d’encourager et coordonner les activités et études consacrées au navigateur. <http://www.laperouse-france.fr/spip.php?rubrique69>
Bibliothèque numérique proposée par la Bibliothèque nationale de France <http://gallica.bnf.fr/> <http://gallica.bnf.fr/?lang=EN>Gallica
[Illustrations de La tragique expédition de Lapérouse et Langle
[Couverture : le char de Neptune. Bateaux de Lapérouse et de Langle. Carte des terres de Polynésie et d'Australie.] [Cote : 16 ° Ln27 85465/Microfilm R 122008]
[Carte double avant la p.10 de l'Avant-propos :] Voyages de Lapérouse 1785-1788 (...). [Cote : 16 ° Ln27 85465/Microfilm R 122008]
[pl. en reg. p.80 :] J.F. Galaup de Lapérouse (...). P.A. Fleuriot de Langle (...). [Cote : 16 ° Ln27 85465/Microfilm R 122008]
<http://www.museum.wa.gov.au/exhibitions/journeys/The_Explorers/de_Laperouse.html> "King Louis XVI selected Jean-François de Galaup, Compte de Lapérouse to lead a major expedition...."
<http://blog.catherinedelors.com/laperouse-explorer-extraordinaire-at-the-musee-de-la-marine/>

Publications:

Le mystère Lapérouse, ou le rêve inachevé d'un roi.
Opération Lapérouse, Journal de bord à Vanikoro.
Lapérouse : Voyage autour du monde.
Les Esprits de Vanikoro : Le mystère Lapérouse.
all at <http://setis.library.usyd.edu.au/ozlit/pdf/p00042.pdf>

I think Wikipedia needs to give some credibility to the French navy, the Frence Ministry of Defence, The French Maritime Museum and other credible French historical bodies including the Lapérouse Museum which clearly describe Lapérouse rather than La Pérouse.

Frankly I feel awkward leaping in and challenging those who may have done some considerable research in the past but there appears to be a bit of a paradigm at hand here and some of the information taken at face value by many is just clearly incorrect. By example [Ecb] you yourself refer to the current flagged ship of the French Navy as being called La Pérouse, yet it is not, rather it is called Lapérouse A791, and yes it is a in the Service Hydrographique et Océanographique de la Marine (a naval service hydrographic and oceangraphic survey ship).

I assume the 19C French ship being refered to is the Laperouse Class Unprotected Cruisers. French Laperouse Class Cruisers of the 1870's and 1880's included D'Estaing, Laperouse, Nielly and Primauguet.

They were wooden hulled ships with Iron beams., these ships had plough bows with a forecastle. Displacement: 2363 tons, Speed 15 Knots Compliment: 264 Armament: Fifteen 5.5 inch M1870M guns, which were later replaced in Primauget with Quick Firing Conversions. also each ship had Eight 1 pounder revolvers.

La Classe de Laperouse les Croiseurs sans défense. Les photographies et l'histoire des Croiseurs de Classe de Laperouse français des 1870 et les 1880 y compris D'Estaing, Laperouse, Nielly et Primauguet. Information is available at: [7]

"The French Cruiser Laperouse, pictured c.1898, prior to being wrecked in the same year in the East Indies".
"Laperouose was built at Brest and launched 1877 finally completed February 1880".

Laperouse1877, Wrecked 1898 <http://www.battleships-cruisers.co.uk/cruisers3.htm>

Under the circumstances this Wikipedia page comes as no surprise to me: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_cruiser_Lapérouse:

"The Lapérouse was a barbette cruiser of the French Navy, lead ship of her class".
"She was part of the Far East Squadron under Admiral Amédée Courbet".
"She later was part of the Indian Ocean squadron".
"Lapérouse was by a storm on 31 September 1898. She was beached on the coast of Madagascar. All hands were saved".

From <http://combatfleetoftheworld.blogspot.com/2010/05/future-of-french-navy-through-storm-but_12.html> and referring to ships by 'class' in the French Navy:

- "1 Lapérouse a class (converted, P675 Arago)"
- 3 "Lapérouse" class hydrographic survey ships (A791-793: Lapérouse, Laplace, Borda), commissioned 1988-1991".

Bibliothèque numérique proposée par la Bibliothèque nationale de France <http://gallica.bnf.fr/> <http://gallica.bnf.fr/?lang=EN>Gallica

[Illustrations de La tragique expédition de Lapérouse et Langle]
[Couverture : le char de Neptune. Bateaux de Lapérouse et de Langle. Carte des terres de Polynésie et d'Australie.] [Cote : 16 ° Ln27 85465/Microfilm R 122008]
[Carte double avant la p.10 de l'Avant-propos :] Voyages de Lapérouse 1785-1788 (...). [Cote : 16 ° Ln27 85465/Microfilm R 122008]
[pl. en reg. p.80 :] J.F. Galaup de Lapérouse (...). P.A. Fleuriot de Langle (...). [Cote : 16 ° Ln27 85465/Microfilm R 122008]

Bibliotheque Toulouse, France

<http://numerique.bibliotheque.toulouse.fr/cgi-bin/superlibrary?a=d&d=/ark:/74899/B315556101_TRUC0815>[Statue de Lapérouse, Albi, 8 juillet 1899>
<http://numerique.bibliotheque.toulouse.fr/cgi-bin/superlibrary?a=d&d=/ark:/74899/B315556101_TRUC0813>[Statue de Lapérouse, Albi, octobre 1905>

Also <http://gallica.bnf.fr/Search?ArianeWireIndex=index&p=1&lang=FR&q=laperouse> I think gives some pause to the argument that the French commonly called this man by other than Lapérouse in a historical context. The Bibliothèque nationale de France has illustrations including maps, portraiture engravings and publications describing Lapérouse in abundance.

I have no investment in this one way or the other, I just see a conflict with the facts may be at hand and in my opinion Wikipedia should err on the side of the French Naval, Defence and Museum authorities in this matter.

To the contrary of the bulk of the information I have provided above I note the following: Jacques Thomas, La Perouse or Laperouse legitimacy of spelling, in "Bulletin of the Society for Historical Studies of New Caledonia", No. 71, 1987 outlines that...(comprehensive study that demonstrates, with strong support from the Institute France and the Ministry of Culture, the name La Perouse must be written in two words, as he was during his lifetime). Jacques Thomas, Epilogue to the question of the spelling of the name La Perouse, in "Acta Geographica" No. 1508, mars/2003, Geography Society, 184, bd. Saint-Germain 75006 Paris. Jacques Thomas also states his case with some vigour on his Wikipedia discussion page. However I struggle to find support for his assertions from the quarters that he refers to.

I note that the Ministry of Culture does not do what Jacques Thomas believes they are doing, indeed it appears it does quite the opposite. On the webpage <http://www.culture.gouv.fr/culture/actualites/communiq/albanel/laperouse.htm> is a photo of France's Minister for Culture and Communication opening l’exposition Lapérouse au Musée de la Marine (19 mars 2008) France's maritime museum, the Musée National de la Marine is, alongside the Central Naval Museum of Saint Petersburg, founded in 1709, the oldest maritime museum in the world. In 1748, Henri-Duhamel du Monceau, Inspector-General of the French Navy, presented his collection of model ships and naval machinery to King Louis XV. They were set out in the Marine Room at the Louvre, for the instruction of students of the newly-founded school of naval engineering and architecture. This organisation uses the spelling Lapérouse. The publication 2e Cahier du Conseil national des parcs et jardins=Le voyage des plantes-Les jardins, acteurs culturels de la biodiversité<http://www.culture.gouv.fr/culture/politique-culturelle/Voyage_des_plantes.pdf> also uses Lapérouse universally, It is a fairly recent Ministry of Culture publication so it seems that no one has told the people at the Ministry of Culture. I have given fuller reference to the Musée National de la Marine above.

As to the FRAN document they are far from convincing and offer as evidence an image of the signature of Lapérouse, as one word, somewhat denying their own argument. They also state that current Lapérouse's also prefer to use one word as their name. With due respect to Dunmore's scholarly achievements, maybe he has it wrong in this matter. [Ecb] I did note your comments about Lapérouse skipping word spaces in his writting but the body of French acceptance of this spelling is quite overwhelming. We must also consider that it was Lapérouse who 'made up' this name as a suffix and if he then chose to sign it as one word, well maybe that was his way of telling us what he intended to do with the name, maybe he was just calling himself Lapérouse as indicated in his handwritten script. Really I think the body of evidence is somewhat in favour of the spelling Lapérouse unless Wikipedia wishes to just ignore the overwhelming majority of the French authorities and academic institutions and press on with other ideas. Maybe someone has some convincing evidence to support the La Perouse spelling, I remain open minded on the subject although quite frankly it is a bit of a struggle to do so.Felix505 (talk) 20:57, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

To spell correctly the name of Jean-François de La Pérouse

Bonjour, My name is Jacques Thomas and I like to say that 'Contra factum non valet argumentum'. Practically, in all the writings of the time, like his own Journal, on the medal especially founded for the departure of the frigates, the name of La Pérouse is always spelled in two words. The exception comes from his signature but at the time, most of the famous French personalities, not to say all of them, whose the name was spelled in two words were signing in a linked manner, in one word. Used to justify the name spelled in one word, this fact has no juridical value. John Dunmore who graces me with his friendship, is surely the most complete, the most precise, the surer of all those who wrote on La Pérouse. He always writes the name in two words. I have made a long study of the correct spelling of the name La Pérouse or Lapérouse (almost 400 pages with correspondence, letters, messages, newspapers articles) and I dare to say that nobody has a better knowledge of the matter than I could have, as the greatest authorities acknowledge it. The navigator made his name after this of a farm named Pérouse which his father had given to him. During all his life, he was named La Pérouse, by His Majesty the King Himself. As he disappeared without having any child, his two sisters and their husbands took for themselves the name La Pérouse but made an official request. Their request was accepted in 1815, but unfortunately with a Y : La Peyrouse. They must have requested for the spelling to be rectified. In 1817, in a letter, chief of the family, Léon de La Pérouse officially required that his name is spelled La Pérouse. The two families made use of this name so spelled up to the end of the century when they were legally obliged to adopt the form Lapérouse because, in 1839, a legal decision had fixed this spelling after the signature of the navigator. What is for a jurist a fault, a signature having no value in such a case. It is the reason why today, the families are named Lapérouse. But the name of the navigator must be spelled La Pérouse. It is a grave historical error to call him Lapérouse which he certainly would not have appreciated. The Institut de France is the supreme authority in this field and here is what I received in a letter from Jean Leclant, Perpetual Secretary: " Je me rallie totalement à votre conclusion - I totally rally to your conclusion... and the Academy comes over to your opinion ..." Despite what is said in a preceding text, the Ministry of Culture wrote me that: " The Minister ( Christine Albanel) asked me to support you in the legitimate fight which you have engaged to denounce this regrettable error. It cannot be contested that this name (of the navigator) must be spelled in two words." After the study which I made of the matter and the most prestigious appreciations of it, I think that Wikipedia should have to correctly inform its readers.

Jacques Thomas -92.157.27.37 (talk) 20:22, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Response to Jacques Thomas

That John Dunmore has taken this approach to the naming of "Lapérouse" is not of great significance. He is just but one of many English (NZ) speaking historians that have decided to follow that line of thinking. He is certainly not representative of all English language sources at any stretch of the imagination and frankly I am surprised at your assertion that he is. I am surely he would be a little more humble than to make such an assertion himself and I note that he does not. The French ministry of Culture have certainly not changed their public policy on this matter in recent times. I am aware of your ongoing campaign in this matter. Indeed you were mentioned in the discussion on this page and your point of view was pointed out and put forward by myself, with notes to your drawing upon Dunmore for support and reasons for not adopting the naming convention that you enthusiastically support. I note that despite your many years of efforts on this matter that the French Ministry of culture continues to use the spelling "Lapérouse". Indeed they remain quite firm on "Lapérouse". I am familiar with your claims about the Ministry of Culture supporting your claims as you have stated them with some enthusiasm elsewhere. However The Minister (Christine Albanel) continued to use Lapérouse after you claimed that they fully supported you. On the webpage <http://www.culture.gouv.fr/culture/actualites/communiq/albanel/laperouse.htm> is a photo of France's Minister for Culture and Communication opening l’exposition Lapérouse au Musée de la Marine (19 mars 2008) France's maritime museum, the Musée National de la Marine. Her Ministry has continues to publish new documents on Lapérouse and mount exhibitions using that naming. The French navy use Lapérouse, the French Maritime Museum, Musée National de la Marine use Lapérouse, the French Ministry of Defence use "Lapérouse", the Lapérouse in Albi use Lapérouse as do many other official government, semi government and private organisations both in France and elsewhere. You rather colourfully claim that the Institut de France is the "supreme authority in this field" which I think is a somewhat exaggerated claim. I also note that Canal Academie is under the umbrella of the Institut de France and they also appear to use "Lapérouse".
This has been exhaustively detailed and discussed already on this page. Read the notes already here and challenge them one by one if you wish but I think you may have trouble taking on the French navy and the Ministry of Culture. Until you can do this successfully and get then maybe you should just leave things alone. If the French Ministry of Culture, the French Marine (Navy), the French museums and similar in other countries started using La Perouse then you might have something tangible to discuss, however they do not and if anything seem to be going further toward the use of "Lapérouse". I also note that many of the sources used in this article previously did not support your naming convention when those sources were fully investigated. Details on that also already appear on this discussion page. Felix 11:24, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Definitive references concerning the name of La Pérouse

 - From the INSTITUT DE FRANCE =

" I have been very interested, Dear Sir, by your research on the spelling of the name Lapérouse or La Pérouse. I totally rally your conclusion which is founded on a really very precise inquiry. The 'Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres' falls in with your very detailed advice ..." - Jean Leclant, Perpetual Secretary of the Academy - 

- From the MINISTRY OF CULTURE =

" Sir, you have wished to attract the attention of the predecessor of Madame Chritine Albanel, Minister of Culture and Commnication, Spokesman of the Gouvernment, on the incorrect manner according to which you observe that the family name of the great navigator Jean-François de La Pérouse is more and more often spelled. The Minister has been very impressed by the terms of your letter which demonstrate a sincere and true attachment to this personality whose disappearing has so deeply marked the history of the French Navy. She also requested of me to support you in the legitimate fight which you have engaged to denounce this regrettable error. As a matter of fact, it cannot be denied that this family name must be spelled in two words. What is confirmed in the most formal manner by the only French institution competent to fix the spelling in France, the Institut..."- Jean-Marie Caillaud, Principal Private Secretary 

 - From the ARCHIVES DE FRANCE =

" Sir, I well received your last mail in which you mention a mail concerning the spelling of the name La Pérouse, signed by Mr Jean Leclant, Perpetual Secretary of the 'Académie des inscriptions et belles lettres'. The quality of the subscriber and the precision of his answer seem to me sufficient to consider that this answer brings a definitive answer to the question which you have raised..." - Martine de Boisdeffre, Directress of the Archives de France - 

 - From the FRENCH NAVY =

"All my congratulations for your very interesting study on the legitimacy of the spelling La Pérouse. You have one more adept..." - Admiral Jean-Louis Battet, former chief of staff -

Jacques Thomas, (92.157.27.37) 16:18, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

A definitive proof of the right spelling La Pérouse

Commissariat Officer in the French Navy, Léon Dalmas de La Pérouse is the common ancestor of all descendants of this branch of family up today. In 1817, he wrote an official letter which is the inalterable proof that the name of the navigator was La Pérouse and no other. Here is an excerpt of this letter:

"Dalmas de La Pérouse Vannes 3 Xbre 1817 - Right to go by the name of La Pérouse - By His Enactment of February 21, 1815, His Majesty has authorized my family to add to their name the one of La Pérouse, my maternal uncle... I pray Your Excellency to command that I am mentionned under the designation of Dalmas de La Pérouse - "

I am sorry for all the supporters of Lapérouse but no argument can face this fact.

Jacques Thomas, November 1st, 2010 (unsigned by : Jacques Thomas 92.157.27.37)

Yet another detailed set of responses to the arguments put forward by Jacques Thomas

Jacques Thomas 92.157.27.37, your assertions are somewhat lacking support. They are also contradictory to the apparent facts. I note upon examining the French articles containing the name Laperouse/La perouse it appears that you have been active in changing, promoting or creating articles using the La Perouse configuration of the name over an extended period of time. This despite the greater part of those article contents dealing with the subject as Laperouse. It is difficult to avoid the overwhelming body of information supporting the established recognition of the name being described as Lapérouse. The French Wikipedia articles that relate to Lapérouse currently have a considerable number of quite ludicrous naming irregularities. For example the school in Albi named after Lapérouse. It seems a Wikipedia editor has named the article on Lycee Lapérouse as Lycee La Perouse. This is entirely misleading and completely inaccurate as the school is clearly named Lycee Lapérouse[1]. On browsing the French WP articles I have found many examples of this absurd behaviour. Another example of absolutely silly behaviour is captioning "La Perouse" to a bust of Lapérouse Fichier:JFdeLapérouse20050110.jpg (Lapérouse par François Rude en 1828)- Bust of Lapérouse, clearly named as "Lapérouse" both on the historic records and on the bust itself. There have been recent activities in the EN WP article on Lapérouse where the French navy ships named Lapérouse have been 'renamed' by editors to show "La Perouse". This is simply vandalism especially when the contents citation links are also changed then breaking those links. I would suggest that it is best if that sort of activity stopped. It is also entirely preposterous for a WP editor to attempt to re-name a commissioned and active ship of the French navy.

Wikipedia is meant to be and encyclopaedic endeavour not a subjective essay. Your opinions appear to be highly subjective and have very little support in either the historic not the contemporary record. Please do not engage in the same activities here on the English language articles as you have on the French articles. What you have done there is quite misleading and in the most part factually incorrect. If a school is officially named Lycee Lapérouse, has a big sign on the front of the building stating Lycee Lapérouse and has a website calling the school Lycee Lapérouse then no one should be establishing an article calling it Lycee La Perouse. That is just ridiculous. The same applies to a statue, a park or a ship. I also note that you have been describing article citations to using the name La Perouse when the cited reference clearly describes the man as Lapérouse. Really this is not a good idea. Today I browsed FR WP articles that only mentioned La Perouse in the article title, everything withing the article including the citations pointing to Lapérouse instead. It makes the WP treatment of Lapérouse just present as a jumbled mess.

Naming convention:

  • 1 ship a Lapérouse a class (converted to P675 Arago)"
  • 3 ships of the "Lapérouse" class hydrographic survey ships (A791-793: Lapérouse, Laplace, Borda), commissioned 1988-1991)".
  • The French Ministry of Defence use the name Lapérouse in their official publications regarding both historic information and contemporary related both to the original voyages of Lapérouse and also to the more recent several contemporary voyages of enquiry (Vanikoro) as to the ship wreck discoveries. The Vanikoro expeditions are documented at Vanikoro expeditions. Exposition Lapérouse is an exhibition copyrighted to the Copyright Ministère de la Défense, (French Ministry of the Defense) was held April 2 to June 26 2005 at the Mussée of Maritime history of Nouméa, exposition "Expedition Laperouse, The Road of the Echanges". Clearly they have called the man Lapérouse. Un bref historique, de 1785 à nos jours, has 14 matches to the name Lapérouse in this official French Ministry of Defence document and none to La Pérouse.A brief history of Lapérouse
  • The French Ministry of Culture use the name Lapérouse in their historic and contemporary information resources. All recent publications and exhibitions supported, initiated or derived from the Ministry have used the name Lapérouse. The French Ministry of Culture uses the name Lapérouse. On the webpage shows a photo of France's Minister for Culture and Communication opening l’exposition Lapérouse au Musée de la Marine on 19 march 2008. The recent publication "2e Cahier du Conseil national des parcs et jardins=Le voyage des plantes-Les jardins, acteurs culturels de la biodiversité" uses the spelling Lapérous Culture/Politique- a botanical voyage
  • The French Maritime Museum use the name Lapérouse in their historic and contemporary information resources. All recent publications and exhibitions supported, initiated or derived from the French Maritime Museum have used the name Lapérouse.
  • Ville d' Albi ( the City of Albi, origin of Lapérouse) refer only to Lapérouse in their official publications. place naming, monument designations and on the city's official municipal authority website.
  • Ville d' Albi has a Lapérouse Square named after Lapérouse. There is also a Lapérouse Theatre in the city named after Lapérouse. Cinéma Cinemovida le Laperouse, a movie theatre in rue Sere-de-Rivieres, Albi, France.
  • In the booklet Lapérouse dans La Marine et les colonies du roi 1756-1788, a creation of the Association Lapérouse Albi (France), authored by its President Pierre Berard, he describes the sea route in the context of colonial warrior and the era that led Lapérouse to be chosen as the maritime explorer of Louis XVI. It is prefaced by Agnes De Fleurieu, Thierry Carcenac, President of the General Council of the Tarn, Philippe Bonnecarrère, Mayor of Albi, Mr. Bru, historian Tarn.
  • The Museum Lapérouse, Albi France only use the name Lapérouse. Musée Lapérouse have recently held and exhibition on Lapérouse. The Exposition temporaire consacrée à l’expédition TARA ARCTIC au Musée Lapérouse du 11 juin au 19 septembre 2010. Lapérouse Museum at Botany Bay Square, 81000 Albi in France. Lapérouse Museum, Botany Bay Square, 81000 Albi, France
  • French Public educational institutions named after him in both France and Noumea use Lapérouse
  • In the French pacific territories not just Noumea recognises the spelling Lapérouse. Mystery of the disapearance of Monsieur de Lapérouse : Vanikoro wreckage - Hypothetical visit of New Caledonia-Wreckage of Jean-François de Galaup, count de Lapérouse. Croixdusud.info New Caledonia also documents "Lapérouse"].
  • The last known letter authored by Lapérouse Last known document authored by Lapérouse was written in Botany Bay in what is now Australia. It was sent back to Europe with the British expedition he met there. It was clearly signed "Lapérouse". Surely Jacques Thomas 92.157.27.37 it is time you recognised the man identified himself as "Lapérouse" and signed his name as such. I remind you this is an official document of the equivalent of French Marine National (the French navy) of the era.

The statue of Lapérouse renamed La Perouse in the WP articles is in fact named Lapérouse. The Statue of Lapérouse in Albi is described and documented in the general catalogue of the Toulouse Bibliothèque as "Statue de Lapérouse, Albi, 8 juillet 1899" see [8]

1852 Notice biographique sur le maréchal Marmont, duc de Raguse, par M. Lapérouse,... [9] is a reasonable example. There are approximately 1000 entries relating to Lapérouse available from that resource.

There are countless other resources of an academic nature, both historic and contemporary that refer the name as Lapérouse. If you wish to explore further afield I have given a number of references to foreign museums including the official maritime museums of other nations. Foriegn academic articles are also provided elsewhere on this discussion page as are historic documents of nations such as Australia who have a significant historical relationship with Lapérouse.

Your activities have made a complete mess of the French WP articles that contain or are specifically about Lapérouse. Please do not continue those activities on the English language pages. I appreciate your drive and determination is no doubt sincere and enthusiastic but your methodology is seriously flawed and your historic and contemporary references are somewhat questionable. If for no other reason please just accept that the man's last written official communication to the King of France and his Naval superiors was signed in the name Lapérouse. Please Jacques Thomas, enough is enough. Felix 11:01, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Regarding La Pérouse, a will is a will

Everybody can make a mistake when one does not know perfectly well the matter which one is speaking of, but the honest man interested in history must know to perfection what he is proclaiming. Probity requires it. Prudence recommends it. He is pledging his credit. When the first descendant of a family to wear an illustrious name firmly requires that this name is spelled La Pérouse, nobody aware of this fact can honestly ignore it, going against his will and so doing, against the course of History.

Jacques Thomas, (92.157.27.37) 13:04, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

My two bits

I've been monitoring the above discussions loosely; I do know that locations in British Columbia named for him use La Pérouse - Mount La Pérouse, La Pérouse Reef, La Pérouse Bank. It's worth noting that the British Columbia Geographical Names Information System, where those entries are from, originally had the mountain as La Perouse, without the accent, but in correcting the name in 1954, added it - and without conforming to the Lapérouse spelling; even commenting [sic] when that spelling is used in a Victoria Times-Colonist article in 2005. To me the reason for the different spelling is really clear, and muddied by historical context and the habits of latter-day writers - especially French writers, but also the Australian ones. "Lapérouse", like Lasalle vs. La Salle, Le Moyne vs. Lemoyne or Lemoine, a "republican" adaptation of a noble name - whether occasionally used by La Pérouse himself (by way of shorthand, it sounds like) or adamantly used by French (and Australian) authors and officials afterwards. To me, it's what the family wants and uses should be what's most important, and also "period" contexts (how it was most commonly used not only by himself but in his day). With a few exceptions, all the "Lapérouse" rationalizations come from later times; and those from French Polynesia would be influenced by post-Republican French and not reflective of the historically accurate form.....Skookum1 (talk) 18:04, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

A valuable support of La Pérouse

The best way to know of an historical fact consists in proceeding up to its source. A book was published in Paris, in 1888, by the "Société de Géographie" for the centenary of La Pérouse disappearing. This book includes a rich bibliography compiled by Gabriel Marcel, a celebrated librarian of the French "Bibliothèque nationale". In this bibliography, La Pérouse is cited 145 times and his name is spelled in two words in practically all the documents mentioned as edited in French before 1815. As, in this case, the signature cannot be taken for a proof, that gives us the surest evidence of the right spelling of La Pérouse's name.

Jacques Thomas - (92.157.27.37) 05:48, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

An address to Mr Felix

Dear Mr.Felix, I do not know who you are and I am not vexed or vindictive. I have just read now with attention your response to my interventions in this talk and like Talleyrand, I am saying : 'All which is excessive, is insignificant.' You run a serious risk in attacking me as you do. A former Captain in the French Army Aviation, having fought four years in Vietnam, Knight of the Legion of Honour, Honorary Naval Aviator of the US Navy, Medal of Gratitude of Lyons Town, member of the International Legion of Intelligence, of the Society of Geography, of the Aéro-Club de France, Honorary President and Honorary Member of associations, I have a certain sense of Honour and Probity. As an historian, I am in quest of what is true or untrue. I do not stoop so low as to cheat. I do not need that to be appreciated and to find what I am in search for. I hate that. I try to act in order that all which I say is true. Without any proof, you accuse me of crimes on the La Pérouse French Wikipedia site which of course I never committed. Surprised, I ask you; "Is is quite fair play ?" I would have preferred a courteous discussion with you, between gentlemen and historians. I think that you would have finished being convinced of what I say and I would have liked to shake hands with you.

Jacques Thomas - November 3, 2010 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.213.237.236 (talk) 21:14, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Evolution of the name La Pérouse

During the study which we made of the matter, we had in hands a lot of original documents concerning La Pérouse himself, his wife Countess Eleonore of La Pérouse, his sister Victoire de Barthez, descendants of the La Pérouse family from the French Navy Commissariat officer Léon Dalmas de La Pérouse. That permitted us to realize an impressive and certainly unique collection of signatures and of the name written by themselves from 1789 to 1871. We took knowledge of two documents in which La Pérouse speaking of himself spells his name in two words, like it is spelled in his own Journal round the World. Even if by sentimental impregnation, Eleonore de La Pérouse has a signature quite similar to this of her husband, she writes their name in two words. On the contrary of Jean-François de La Pérouse himself, all others sign whith their name in two words. It seems that this fact changes around 1877, when the 'Livret de famille' is created. Despite the King's edit of 1839, wrongly fixing the name according to a signature, the family had continued to write their name in two words, but probably now they are obliged to adopt the name in one word. It seems that it is from this time that the form Lapérouse begins to spread. The family being named Lapérouse, some imagined that it was the name of the navigator. Others wanted to extend the name back to him. What of course was incorrect and might not have been done. We regret that many people follow the wrong track today because they do not know the realty. Even some great institutions follow this track, draped in the folds of their false certitude mostly due to a signature of no significance or to an unwanted modification of the name of a family. We are tempted to say that "There are none so deaf as those who don't want to hear."

Jacques Thomas – November 4, 2010 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.213.237.236 (talk) 06:07, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Jacques Thomas 109.213.237.236 (talk), this article is about the man Jean-François de Galaup, comte de Lapérouse, not his family. If some members of his family wish to call themselves by either Lapérouse or La Pérouse then that is entirely their own business. What we need to deal with here is the name of Jean-François de Galaup, comte de Lapérouse. He was a significant French figure of the Age of Enlightenment, a French explorer, a naval officer of some distinction and the Captain of several vessels of the Marine National. As the French government, the French navy, the historical association in Albi formed in his honour, the museum founded in Albi in his honour, the French Maritime museum and the maritime museums of several other nations all refer to him as Lapérouse and the last time he signed his name on an official naval document he signed as Lapérouse then, here at Wikipedia it is most appropriate that we do the same. Wikipedia is not meant to be a venue for reformation or debate. Rather it is meant to be an encyclopaedic resource. If all those institutions refer to him as Lapérouse then we need to do the same. The policies of Wikipedia dictate that as editors we only follow authoritative and citable information that can be readily supported by published and verifiable information. If all those authoritative French institutions all change to La Pérouse then we would need to document that instead. However at this time the official historical position of those significant French institutions appears to firmly lie with "Lapérouse" as the spelling. I sympathise with you in that this may conflict with your views on the matter and there is clearly some historic confusion surrounding the matter. However we must document the historical record here not attempt to revise nor reform it, that is not the role of Wikipedia. I suggest your energies may be better spent partitioning the Marine Nasional, the Musée National de la Marine and the Ministry of Defence to revise their interpretation of history if you feel sufficiently motivated. However my understanding is that you have done so already with some considerable vigour and enthusiasm and that they have not changed their stand on the matter. Do you have a viewpoint on why Jean-François de Galaup, comte de Lapérouse signed his name as "Lapérouse". I have read of opinions that he was being "informal" however I note he did this not only on personal letters but also on official documents including naval logs. Felix 13:55, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Birth of a myth or 'From La Pérouse to Lapérouse'

If one has a look at the French Larousse Dictionary, at the Encyclopaedia Britannica, at the Encyclopaedia Quid, at the French version of Wikipedia, one can see that it is wisely and intelligently referred to the navigator as to La Pérouse. There are in the Larousse Dictionary more than 70 persons whose names include the definite article 'La' which is not attached. I could have had in hand original documents written and signed by many of these celebrities. Most of them would have a linked signature, in one word, and nobody would have the idea to change the form of their name today. When writing rapidly with a quill-pen, it was easier so doing than to rise the pen and to precisely form two characters. La Pérouse was far to be alone to do that. It was not an anomaly. It was quite common. Consulted, a specialized lawyer studied the matter and wrote that : " From a graphological point of view, it is quite significant to note that the navigator had a tendency to attached words to other words whereas he separates the article from the other word when he writes his name, La Pérouse, in a text. . . It is quite bold to announce that a signature in one word is a proof of spelling, still more if the author has a linked way of writing while he separates the article when he writes his own name." La Pérouse disappeared in 1788. Before his fatal disappearance he was always during his whole life considered as wearing a name written in two parts. For instance, in the Royal Ordinance signed by His majesty the King making him a Commodore, we find his name four times, written in two words. It is in two words that his name is engraved on the silver or bronze medals stricken on the occasion of the frigates Departure. By this time, everybody knew him as La Pérouse. The linked form, Laperouse, officially appeared 51 years after the navigator's disappearing, as an administrative obligation for the descendants of his two sisters who previously had adopted his name written in two words. How could it be the navigator's name since it did not exist yet ? From this time a myth has started to arise and develop step by step. His heirs had no longer the possibility of wearing the navigator's name in two words, and their name in one word began to be posthumously transferred to La Pérouse himself. Supported by the linked signature of La Pérouse and his heirs' name, the myth grew deeply and was so widely taken for realty than it was adopted by some authors, associations, museums and other institutions. After no longer than a century, very few people were aware of the truth or tried to investigate. However there were a few islets of resistance and disorder reigned which incited me to undertake a complete and exacting study of the matter when, in 1988, the French Navy had abandoned a tradition and given a new survey ship the name "Lapérouse". Maybe not for ever ! Praised by the highest authorities, this study definitely proves that the name of Jean-François de La Pérouse cannot and may not be written otherwise than in two words 

  Jacques Thomas – November 8, 2010
Jacques Thomas, Lapérouse (A 791) le bâtiment hydrographique de deuxième classe (BH) Lapérouse is an active serving ship of the French navy. The Lapérouse (A 791) is the lead ship of several sister ships of the Lapérouse class. This is not however the first ship of the French navy to carry this name.
Previously there was a Cruiser class also carrying the name Lapérouse In the 1870's and 1880's. Ships of that class included D'Estaing, Lapérouse, Nielly and Primauguet. The lead ship of the class (La Classe de Laperouse les Croiseurs sans défense) was called the Lapérouse
They were wooden hulled ships with Iron beams, these ships had plough bows with a forecastle. Displacement: 2363 tons, Speed 15 Knots Compliment: 264 Armament: Fifteen 5.5 inch M1870M guns
La Classe de Lapérouse les Croiseurs sans défense. The Lapérouse was a barbette cruiser of the French Navy, lead ship of her class. She was part of the Far East Squadron under Admiral Amédée Courbet. She later was part of the Indian Ocean squadron. Lapérouse was lost in a storm on 31 September 1898 and was beached on the coast of Madagascar.
The French naval cruiser, Lapérouse, laid down at at Brest, 23 June 1875
Jacques Thomas you have given 3 references. There is however a staggering number of authoritative sources that use Lapérouse. A few of the many have been listed above. To refer to WP FR is not useful as the WP FR articles are riddled with inconsistencies and need a thorough review for accuracy. Britannica I have already discussed above. I gather you have not read the existing information supplied in that regard.
Britannica cites John Dunmore who is a NZ academic with some firm ideas on naming conventions of Lapérouse that appear to seriously conflict with mainstream French authoritative sources as well as many EN language academic and museum sources. If the Britanica cited links are followed further I arrive at "Allen, Edward Webber. The Vanishing Frenchman: The Mysterious Disappearance of Lapérouse (Rutland, Vermont: C.D. Tuttle, Co., 1959)" and "Inglis, Robin. The Lost Voyage of Lapérouse (Vancouver Maritime Museum, 1986)." It is possibly disingenuous to refer to Britannica without actually examining and referencing the sources that Britannica cites, if you do an very different conclusion may be drawn. I do not have a copy of the French Larousse Dictionary at hand. Looking at the French Larousse Dictionary(FR)/Encyclopaedia(FR) resource online is of little productive value, it only offers "Pérouse en italien Perugia" . Jacques Thomas I think you need to have a look at some more of the name signing by Lapérouse, they appear far from an accident and rather is a quite fluid scroll and repeated in the same form on a number of documents I have examined. The signature appears quite bold, deliberate and quite purposeful and certainly far from accidental. Indeed he uses the same scroll on many occasions and it has a set form to it.
The last document Lapérouse sent home, signed-Lapérouse

Indeed the La is not linked to a P as you appear to be suggesting. Rather the La is linked to a p, clearly forming the word Lapérouse in one fluid movement, rather than LaPérouse or La_Pérouse, I suggest you might like to re-examine your conclusions. The image supplied for you on this page is an image of Lapérouse's signed journal despatched with the HMS Siius and originally held in the French naval archives. It seems quite clear and unambiguous in presenting his signature. I not it is an officially archived document of the Marine National.

You state "In 1988, the French Navy had abandoned a tradition and given a new survey ship the name "Lapérouse"".

This idea of yours appears to rather seriously conflict with the Marine National. The French navy were sailing around in a Cruiser named the Lapérouse over 100 years prior to this and indeed named a whole class of ships by this name, there were at least four of them, as lifted above. I have included a photo of that ship with this response to aid in clarity. The French navy were not "breaking from tradition" indeed they were following it, and that was to use the spelling Lapérouse. Felix (talk) 17:31, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Jacques Thomas, please try and remember to sign your posts using the ~~~~ so others know who is authoring your comments here. Felix (talk) 17:31, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Aboard the 'Lapérouse'

I know well the matter and the ship. I have excellent contacts in the French Navy and I was invited twice aboard the "Lapérouse", one time to cruise. There is aboard a precious collection of copies of ancient documents concerning Jean-François de La Pérouse which I offered to the ship. I know why the Navy abandonned the tradition. Maybe not for long. If you have a look at the official Magazine "Cols bleus" of July 11, 2009, you can read on the front cover: "Carnet de voyage du BH La Pérouse".and if you search for 'Navires célèbres", on Internet <netmarine>,you will see now "La Pérouse" The two last chiefs of Staff of the Navy fully agreed with my views. Admiral Fournery who had commanded the" La Pérouse" in the Indian Ocean was also a good friend of mine. With a Navy Captain, another of my friends, we found the grave of Eleonore de La Pérouse and I organized the two first official ceremonies to Her Memory and to this of La Pérouse. The Ambassador of America and the Navy Chief of Staff were represented. Several Navy officers were present who knew well my point of view. Invited to join by plane the aicraft Carrier USS 'Enterprise' on manoeuver out at sea, I offered to the Captain a portrait of La Pérouse who galantly fought at sea during the American War of Independence. At last, I have the pleasure of keeping bonds of warm friendship with three ladies, sisters born Dalmas de Lapérouse, though they are perfectly aware of my point of view. Jacques Thomas (talk) 20:14, 8 November 2010 (UTC) 109.213.237.236 (talk) 19:55,

How to find La Pérouse

On Internet, the track is a little more complicated than this previously mentioned : On <net.marine> Histoire et patrimoine : 1 - Thèmes géographiques - La Marine à Mururoa = "La Pérouse" - 2- Divers - Les marins célbres = La Pérouse. Jacques Thomas (talk) 21:00, 8 November 2010 (UTC) November 8, 2010

Thank you Jacques Thomas, however I know how to find references to La Perouse. They are plentiful especially as there are geographic points named in that manner.A WP article on La Perouse, New South Wales (the suburb) in Sydney, Australia is a good example. However it must be noted that the Lapérouse Museum there, the National Park service that control a large body of land and park area within the suburb and the well recognised Powerhouse Museum, the New South Wales Government and the Australian Maritime Museum all use "Lapérouse". Australian Federal Handbook 84th meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science, held in Australia, August, 1914 makes the use of "Laperouse" quite clear. Even though a lot of English language sources have often in the past preferred "La Perouse" most contemporary Australian scholars also use "Lapérouse". Yet there is a suburb named there La Perouse. Of course no one would change the name of the suburb, that would be absurd. However authoritative sources there all refer to the man himself as "Lapérouse". There are more available from Canadian, US and UK sources. The point here is that there are of course many anomalies in this and any internet search will of course be obfuscated by that.
That you know of and have personally engaged individuals who support your views on the naming of Jean-François de Galaup is without doubt. I am sure that one here including myself would think to question that. Indeed your account above sounds very interesting and your travels and investigations are certainly of interest to this editor. However the point here is that the majority of the authoritative sources both French and foreign all support the naming convention "Lapérouse". WP need so to follow that otherwise the articles than have content concerning Lapérouse are in serious conflict with the more substantial, verifiable and authoritative sources. So WP currently has to reflect that to which you clearly object. Even if the Captain of Lapérouse (A 791) himself thinks the ship has the wrong name he cannot take a can of paint and change it, and neither can we here at Wikipedia, nor should we. The Jean-François de Galaup, comte de Lapérouse article name currently reflects the naming convention used by the French government and French navy, all the institutions listed above and many more. Jacques Thomas, if they change then the article might be changed but until they do it should reflect only Jean-François de Galaup, comte de Lapérouse. Your ealier suggestion to refer to French language WP articles concerning Lapérouse is unhelpful as the French articles are often full of errors. For an easy example I refer you to:
  • The Wikipedia article on the French Cruiser Lapérouse WP/FR La Pérouse (1877) is a good example of some of the irregularities in the French WP articles that are related to Lapérouse.
The Plaque commemorating François de Galaup, comte de Lapérouse (Brest)
  • I also refer you to French navy construction drawings of the ship "LAPEROUSE, Naval construction plans". So why do we have a FR WP article calling this French naval ship by a name other than than that it bore when a commissioned ship of the French navy. It is also described as "LAPEROUSE" at a Directory of plans of French naval vessels (Historical) from the French Ministry of Defence. Seems incongruous to say the least and is a shocking inaccuracy in an encyclopaedic reference such as FR Wikipedia where is is described as La Pérouse (1877) without any reference to "Lapérouse". The article also lacks a link to an authoritative Marine nationale source for the ship. Interestingly that article has a link to Wikimedia commons where there are several images of the model of the Cruiser Lapérouse held on display at the Brest naval museum. There is is described unsurprisingly as "Lapérouse".
  • The plaque commemorating Lapérouse at Brest in his home port and site of a significant French naval base is available on Wikicommons.
So Jacques Thomas (talk), again I sympathise with you and I recognise your enthusiasm and commitment. However you must understand that your exploits are what is refered to at WP as "own research" and does not qualify. It is not to say though that it is not very interesting. If I may may make a recommendation. I note you have now registered at WP EN as an editor. Perhaps this energy would be better spent setting up an account of both your supporting documentation and your own mission regarding the naming of Jean-François de Galaup and describe that on your account (talk) page. Frankly I find your account of your own exploits, such as those you have touched on above, to be of more interest than this somewhat fruitless exchange here. I encourage you to re-direct your enthusiasm to that and also to engage the Marine nationale, the Ministry of Defence and the French Maritime Museum to consider your proposals and if appropriate then change the official position on the naming convention. Jacques Thomas, you have described yourself as a member of Intertel, a former Army aviator (serving in Vietnam) and a commissioned officer of the French army. It is not your credibility, your intelligence, your good character nor your undoubted wealth of life experience that is being questioned here. It is your sources in the context of WP article information and your claim of support from notable institutions where indeed it appears that support is rather more that of an informal support by individuals associated with those various institutions. Maybe you need to apply your energies toward persuading those institutions to promote change in this matter. Here at WP you are just whipping a dead horse until those institutions of notable authority such as the Marine nationale and the French Maritime museum change their stance on the matter. I must ask this question of you, what official response have you had from the Lapérouse association and the Lapérouse museum in Albi, the Marine nationale and the Maritime museum? Felix (talk) 10:06, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
  1. ^ http://laperouse.entmip.fr/
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Jean-François_de_Galaup,_comte_de_Lapérouse/Archive_1&oldid=1089777951"