|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
|This article has an assessment summary page.|
Unsigned earlier messages
Dampier’s birthday is not known but would have been shortly before his christening in St. Michael’s Church, East Coker, recorded on 5 September 1651. More biographical details at http://www.apirateofexquisitemind.com/
- This should be noted in the article. Spevw 22:12, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
Here is an excerpt from a site: "Pirate William Dampier is also said to have excavated several caves in the sandstone in 1822 and hidden treasure valued at over 60 million." Well, if that is true why did he die BEFORE 1822? That site must be lying. Had I not checked Wikipedia I might never have noticed. My thanks goes out to whoever posted the true information.
I would like to see a section on the early life of dampier added to the page. there is a bit to fill in between being a plantation worker and becoming a pirate, eg logcutting exploring.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 08:11, 14 October 2005 in dead — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 23:43, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
Relatively unknown in Australia?
Dampier was one of the explorers taught when I was in primary school in Australia in the '80s. I realise I'm one in 21 million, but it was part of the syllabus, so I would assume that others were taught the same thing. It really should be removed or cited properly.Twinstar (talk) 08:28, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Date of birth discrepancy
- I see from the ADB source that he was baptised on 5 September, so I've changed the infobox. -- JackofOz (talk) 02:37, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
Not clear where the ships were heading, and what was their mission.
- Have expanded the section to try and address these issues. — Dr.Gulliver (talk) 07:25, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
Date of death is not known
Ever since this edit on 7 February 2012, we've been showing Dampier's death date as 8 March 1715. It's sourced to this West Australian newspaper article from 1935. Nowhere else that I've ever seen is the date specified so exactly. I very strongly doubt that it has any historical authority, because later and more reliable sources certainly do not venture to be so precise. I would discount it as journalistic licence.
This says he died "sometime before 23 March 1715". This says his will was proven on 23 March, but neither the date nor place nor circumstances of his death were recorded, and his resting place is unknown. That means that we don't even know his death occurred in March 1715, let alone on any particular date.
I would prefer that we say he died before 23 March 1715 and leave it at that, but with a footnote explaining why we can't be any more precise.
Also, we're showing 5 September 1651 as his date of birth, but all we know for sure is that he was baptised that day. I know it's tempting to plug gaps in our knowledge, but we can't just make stuff up and expect to be taken seriously as a reputable encyclopedia.
- Wikipedia cites evidence that Dampier was baptized in 1651. What is the source for your information that he wasn't born until 1678? Dolphin (t) 22:06, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
His ship was rotten and its carpenter apparently inept ... While anchored offshore the ship had started to take water, and though sent below to effect repair, the carpenter only made it worse.
This is hardly credible. Dampier lost every ship he ever commanded in the South Sea to ship worms. If a wooden vessel is not properly protected, there is little any carpenter can do because every exposed plank will eventually be compromised (much as termites do on land). The article should avoid making excuses for Dampier, as others do. — Dr.Gulliver (talk) 10:57, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
Dampier was a sea captain and explorer, but was he also a pirate? He likely committed acts of piracy (though he himself denied it)—part of a proud English tradition that has included Francis Drake, George Shelvocke and others. But does this make him a pirate? Drake was knighted by the queen in consideration of his contributions to the treasury. And Shelvocke bought off enough witnesses that the case against him collapsed. Pirates were hung. Since Dampier was not hung, nor, indeed, even charged, we cannot definitively say he was a pirate by occupation—that would be libelous. — Dr.Gulliver (talk) 04:32, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
- the term you looking for is privateer while there is very little distinction between the two and both are commonly interchanged without changing meaning the reason for no prosecution would be due his actions having some sanctioning from the Crown. Also I doubt there would be libelous issues here over the use of either term as would not cause Dampier any loss in trade or profession nor would it make people think any less of him if anything its had the opposite effect in promoting him as a historical figure where he would have otherwise been relatively forgotten. Gnangarra 05:29, 25 February 2014 (UTC)