Talk:Stephen Decatur

Untitled

I thought he was a Marine Officer ?

Of course not, no navy would let a Marine captain a ship! I suppose maybe some in the USMC consider him an "honorary Marine" for his unusual willingness to get in there hand-to-hand... Stan 00:55, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

he's my great-great uncle

Stephen Decatur is legended to have shot at the Jersey Devil. Put a whole through the beast, which was unaffected.

I had never heard the legend, but after some checking, I do find corroboration for the legend. That is fascinating! Auror 16:31, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Revision: I removed the link to "John Carden", as the linked page for him wasn't the right John Carden.

Suggestion: In the communities list, there should also be Decatatur Island in WA State in the San Juan Islands.

This article states that he is the youngest Captain in the history of the U.S. Navy, but it doesn't specify what ship and at what age he attained his captaincy. Request a referenced clarification is made as soon as possible. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.42.144.161 (talk) 06:09, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

How his name sounds in English?

Hi, I'm Russian so I don't know the true pronounciation of his name. Is it like French or like English? --Maxrossomachin (talk) 17:23, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

NPOV?

This written in an incredibly non-encyclopedic way. Just from the first few paragraphs alone "Before marrying the beautiful and intelligent Wheeler he had already made vows to serve his country faithfully and honorably and felt to not do so would make him unworthy of her hand" and "In every theater of operation Decatur's service in the nation's young Navy was characterized with heroism and exceptional performance where he emerged as a national hero who ultimately came to be identified as the father of the post revolutionary American Navy". Needs to be completely re-written to remove all of the hyperbole. If I knew how to insert the NPOV box thingy, I would do so Robinr22 (talk) 08:12, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Have reworded. Two authors, Waldo and Mackenzie, both make mention of her beauty and intelligence in the context that she was pursued by other notable individuals, including the Brother of Napoleon, thus portraying the type of woman Decatur chose to marry, however my original wording perhaps needed toning down on that one note. Gwillhickers (talk) 20:06, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

It's less whether the assertions are sourced, but really whether the tone itself is appropriate. For example, I could easily find a reputable source stating that Bill Gates is the most generous entreprenuer in history, all Africa is grateful to him for wise and magnanmous contributions to medical research and he is the world's most amazing businessman. But if I put that in his article it would be reverted and rightly so, because the language would give an unbalanced impression of him and wouldn't be neutral, not to mention that it would add very little to the article. This article, while very comprehensive, well written and well sourced comes across as a hagiography. Even Mother Teresa gets some criticsm...

Though, on looking at it further large parts of the article seems to have been lifted from http://militaryhistory.about.com/od/naval/p/sdecatur.htm albeit closely paraphrased in places. For example, from this page "the Intrepid, disguised as a Maltese merchant ship and flying British colors, casually entered Tripoli harbor. Claiming that they had lost their anchors in a storm, Decatur asked permission to tie up alongside the captured frigate...When the two ships were close enough, Decatur stormed aboard Philadelphia with sixty men. Fighting with swords and pikes, they took control of the ship without losing a single man and began preparations to set it on fire." vs from the about.com page "Intrepid, disguised as a Maltese merchant ship and flying British colors, entered Tripoli harbor. Claiming that they had lost their anchors in a storm, Decatur asked permission to tie up alongside the captured frigate. As the two ships touched, Decatur stormed aboard Philadelphia with sixty men. Fighting with swords and pikes, they took control of the ship and began preparations to burn it". This would seem to be in breach of Wikipedia:Copyrights, especially as the original page is not sourced in any of the links. So now I would say that the article should not only be written to remove the POV but also to remove the copyright violations. Robinr22 (talk) 09:46, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

I share your concerns. With enough time I will be overhauling the page appropriately. elle _{vécut heureuse} ^{à jamais} (be free) 16:12, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

First my apologies for not responding sooner and for the edit with the copyright issue on the Stephen Decatur page. Some times I will edit in a general statement closely worded from a given source, reorganize/word it and then build on it, using more reliable sources. It looks in this case that I never got around to this passage in that regard. I would be happy to make any corrective edits immediately but as you must know the page is tagged and can't be edited at this time. I am wondering if this was necessary, as almost anyone could have made a corrective edit. I often make similar corrections (usually for lack of citations) in my travels. When I first came to the Stephen Decatur page in May the article was tagged for lack of citations and was lacking them throughout the page. As for the article's tone and such, it does paint Decatur in sort of a biased way, but not such where any meaning or history has been altered. Again, my apologies. I would be more than happy to edit/correct any issues the page has. I am also hoping that the editor who said 'he' (alone?) will "overhaul" the page will do so without deleting information and approach the page in a constructive manner. I am quite familiar with this subject and have several hard texts for sources and know of and am familiar with many others and will be more than happy to take on any issues and work with others who would also like to bring the page up to WP standards. Regards, Gwillhickers (talk) 22:05, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Rewrite

I have corrected an edit with copyright issues and placed the 'rewrite' in the appropriate sub page here. If there are other items that might need attention please bring it to the attention of any contributing editors here. Thank you. Gwillhickers (talk) 10:40, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Progress: -- The longer passages with similarities in text are being corrected on the 'rewrite' sub page. The common short phrases that appear in the source, I am hoping, pose no copyright issues in their use here. My apologies once again. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 01:45, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

His Mother's Name?

His mother is stated to have been Priscilla Pine. In the Wiki piece on his father, Stephen Decatur, Sr., she is named as Ann Pine. ?? Irish Melkite (talk) 13:31, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Was the duel unfair?

I understand that both the commodores fired after the word "two" rather than waiting for the "three". That would render the behaviour of those "alleged" gentlemen less than honest. Stephen Decatur was well-known for his bravery and sense of honour and I really doubt he can resort to such a fellonery. Are we supposed to believe his adversary, who was 11 year older than him, had the ability to woundly hit him? In any case, according to the duel rules, the duel-assistants had to fire on the cheat sniper. Why did'nt they do that?

According to the article they were instructed "You are neither to fire before the word 'one', nor after the word 'three'" Which means that they were correct to fire at two. I do not know why you should consider an age difference of 11 years a handicap in a pistol duel.

(Alan3278 (talk) 09:48, 12 September 2012 (UTC))

Endymion and President

Endymion and President The whole tenor of this article is overly hagiographic for instance "In almost every theater of operation, Decatur's service was characterized with acts of heroism and exceptional performance in the many areas of military endeavor." but the passage on the battle between Endymion and President is vary inaccurate. Decatur surrended to Endymion ( a more lightly armed ship ) long before the other ships in the squadron came near. Endymion was not disabled to the extent suggested in the article. Please see "The Challenge", Andrew Lambert

Alan3278 (talk) 13:56, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Our Country, Right or Wrong

This quote seems to be incorrectly worded. As far as I can tell, it should be "Our Country! In her intercourse with foreign nations may she always be in the right' but our country, right or wrong!" I couldn't find anywhere on the internet besides wikipedia and wikiquotes that does not use this version, so I assume it to be correct. Zraans (talk) 03:41, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Blockade at New London

Correcting "Mohawk Point" to "Montauk Point", since the location of the British fleet disagrees with the two online sources cited.

The edit that introduced "Mohawk Point" was 509722862

This edit says: ...Hardy's squadron, which emerged from behind Mohawk Point, consisted of the ships...

1. The first source, Waldo, pp. 199-200, says: "At this moment the remainder of the British squadron - a 74 a Razee and a frigate showed themselves coming from their covert behind Montauk Point."
2. The second source, Fenimore, p. 22, says: "..., the three vessels got under way, and passed Hell Gte on the 27th of May, with a view to run off the coast between Montauk and Block Island. It was June the 1st before the ships found an opportunity to pass through the race: but they were met at the end of island by a greatly superior force, and were chased into New London. "

This makes sense as Montauk Point is south east of the fast running entrance to Long Island Sound. Further, online searches find no "Mohawk Point" on the Eastern Seaboard.

--Lent (talk) 03:30, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Stephen Decatur. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20130927180950/http://www.history.navy.mil/books/callahan/reg-usn-d.htm to http://www.history.navy.mil/books/callahan/reg-usn-d.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:33, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Mass deletions

@Dilidor: Please discuss the changes if you want to reduce the article in such a capacity. Most of the content that was deleted has been in place for many years, and we've received nothing but thanks and compliments about the article. We will need a clear consensus if you are insisting, You also reverted my latest edits, some major details involving Decatur. Much research and sourcing has gone into this article. It's not right that it's all swept away without discussing it first. I see a few things that the article can live without, so I'll make some edits to this effect, but deleting entire paragraphs and entire sections is a bit overkill.
For example, your claim in edit history that the "Leopard-Chesapeake affair which has nothing whatsoever to do with Decatur", is wrong. It is central to the reasons why Barron and Decatur had a duel, where Decatur was killed. Readers, at least those interested in history, should see the circumstances that prompted Decatur to confront Barron in such a strong fashion. Please let's not edit war and discuss any changes you feel strongly about, one step at a time. Thanx. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 18:03, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

I concur with Gwillhickers' rationale above. The article was not overlong to begin with, but appropriately touched on the subjects that served as background to what might be the main thrust of Decatur's bio. I disagreed or was 50/50 on most of these edits as I saw them in watchlist, but was waiting until I had more time to properly engage with a discussion on them. I do agree that some things can be removed, such as the root causes of the War of 1812, or other individual edits, but on the whole I think a more engrossing approach is a better service to the reader than a bare bones narrative of just his deeds with minimal context. JesseRafe (talk) 19:40, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

I agree with both of the comments above. I suggest that Dilidor prioritize his changes and bring them here for discussion. Tom (North Shoreman) (talk) 19:51, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

_____________

The article suffers severely from bloat. Here is just one random example from my earlier edits; the following was the original text (and current due to mass wholesale reverts):

By July 1, 1799, United States had been refitted and repaired and commenced its mission to patrol the south Atlantic coast and West Indies in search of French ships which were preying on American merchant vessels. After completing this mission the ship was taken to Norfolk, Virginia, for minor repairs and then set sail for Newport, Rhode Island, arriving on September 12. While the ship was berthed there, Commodore Barry received orders to prepare for a voyage to transport two U.S. envoys to Spain and on December 3 sailed on United States for Lisbon via England. During the crossing the ship encountered gale force winds, and at their insistence the two envoys were dropped off at the nearest port in England.[34] Upon returning home and arriving on the Delaware River on April 3, 1800, it was discovered that United States had incurred damage from the storms she had weathered at sea. Consequently, the vessel was taken up the Delaware to Chester, Pennsylvania, for repairs.[35] Not wanting to remain with United States during the months of repairs and outfitting, Decatur obtained a transfer to the brig USS Norfolk[36] under the command of Thomas Calvert. In May the Norfolk sailed to the West Indies to patrol its waters looking for French privateers and men-of-war. During the months that followed 25 armed enemy craft were captured or destroyed. With orders to rendezvous with merchantmen bound for America, Norfolk continued on to Cartagena (Colombia) with orders to escort the ships back to the United States, protecting them from pirates and privateers.

The following is what I edited that paragraph into:

United States commenced its mission of patrolling the south Atlantic and West Indies in search of French ships which were preying on American merchant vessels in July, 1799. After several missions, it was discovered that United States had incurred damage from storms at sea, and she was taken up the Delaware to Chester, Pennsylvania for repairs in April 1800.[34] Decatur did not want to remain with United States during the months of repairs and outfitting, so he obtained a transfer to the brig USS Norfolk[35] under the command of Thomas Calvert. In May, the Norfolk sailed to the West Indies to patrol its waters looking for French privateers and men-of-war and 25 armed enemy craft were captured or destroyed over the following months.

I have bolded the bulk of what I removed in my edit on the Quasi-War subsection. You will note that the details are extraneous to the overall topic—which is the life and career of Stephen Decatur, not the history of the quasi-war or the ship he was sailing or the weather. I have merely been trying to focus this article on Decatur and jettison some of the excessive ballast that is sinking it down to Davy Jones, to utilize a suitable metaphor. Nevertheless, I do not feel strongly enough about it to do battle on whether or not my edits were improving it. —Dilidor (talk) 10:58, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

This, on the large was an example of a largely good one. Others not so much. There was a lot of them, and on the balance, I'd err on restoring fully, and then culling, rather than delete so much and then having to re-add (or more tedious, yet, re-source!). But things that happen to a ship under Decatur's command are relevant, things that happened immediately prior to the ship that influence his decision can be a sentence or even a clause. JesseRafe (talk) 13:49, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

To any one interested in the subject, this is called historical context, not "bloat". It gives the interested reader a comprehensive understanding of some of the surrounding circumstances. There are no page length issues, and all information is well sourced, so all we really have is a difference of opinion. e.g.At what point does the shade of grey become dark.

Examples :

Here is just a sampling of some of the items deleted, all directly involving Decatur:

• a squadron under the command of Commodore John Rodgers in President, along with Commodore Stephen Decatur of United States, Argus, Essex and Hornet, departed from the harbor at New York City.

• After overseeing the completion of gunboats, Decatur returned to Norfolk in March 1807 and was given command of the Naval Yard at Gosport. While commissioned there he received a letter from the residing British consul to turn over three deserters from the British ship Melampus
• ...an event whose controversy would lead to a duel between Barron and Decatur some years later, as Decatur served on Barron's court-martial and later was one of the most outspoken critics of the questionable handling of Chesapeake'
• Preble divided his gunboats into two divisions, putting Decatur in command of the second division.
• Decatur's vessel was made to look like a common merchant ship from Malta and was outfitted with British colours.
• As Decatur's ship came closer to Philadelphia, Catalano called out to the harbor personnel in Arabic that their ship had lost its anchors during a recent storm and was seeking refuge at Tripoli for repairs.
• As Decatur approached the berthed Philadelphia he encountered a light wind that made his approach tedious.
• Because of Decatur's great successes in the War of 1812 and for his knowledge of and past experience at the Algerian port, Crowninshield chose him to command the lead ship...
• Decatur surprised the few Tripolitans on board when he shouted the order "board!", signaling to the hidden crew below to emerge and storm the captured ship

There were many more such statements that were removed wholesale. What's also troubling is that many of the comments in edit history were very misleading and often simply wrong.

e.g."deleting Leopard-Chesapeake affair which has nothing whatsoever to do with Decatur".

Also, some of the other comments in edit history were rather sarcastic and sometimes derogatory. -- Having said that, I will work to trim any text that really goes far afield. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 18:27, 5 April 2018 (UTC)