Meet In CommonNewsRSS feeds

Local

Wisconsin woman remembers father lost in Edmund Fitzgerald sinking 51 years ago

Meet in Common connects news with real conversations. Use ThinkMatch to arrange a Roundtable and meet people to discuss this story.

Source: WMTV 15 NEWS

MADISON, Wis. (WMTV) - A Wisconsin woman is remembering her late father, who was one of the 29 men killed when the Edmund Fitzgerald ship sank 51 years ago in Lake Superior. “My dad was a big guy, but he was a teddy bear. He rarely disciplined, he was a big hugger, and a very loving father,” said Debbie Gomez-Felder. Oliver Champeau, also known as Buck, was originally from Sturgeon Bay, Wisconsin. He eventually made his way to Milwaukee where he met Gomez-Felder’s mother. As a merchant marine, Champeau would be gone for weeks, even months at a time. “He was on the ships forever, so he wasn’t around a lot for holidays and birthdays and things like that,” Gomez-Felder said. “It was very hard. I feel for him, it was a very lonely life. But for us, too.” Eventually, Champeau found himself employed as the Third Assistant Engineer on the Edmund Fitzgerald.

This excerpt comes from the named source. Read the original for the full reporting.

Read the original at WMTV 15 NEWS

Featured places to meet in Superior, WI

Explore these places and arrange a conversation through ThinkMatch.

A&W

A&W 701 Belknap Street Superior, WI, 54880 US

Arby's

Arby's 3821 Tower Avenue Superior, WI, 54880 US

Burger King

Burger King 724 Belknap Street Superior, WI, 54880-2935 US

City guide for Superior, WI

Community Poll

New local ventures should actively contribute to the surrounding community.

Share your view, then see how readers voted. No sign-in required. This poll is shared across stories.

Do you agree or disagree?

Choose one answer

Common Quandary

A Common Quandary to discuss

Another conversation to explore, separate from this news story.

Software says a student cheated with AI. Is that enough to fail the paper?

A teacher suspects several essays were written with AI. Detection software marks one student's work as highly likely to be generated, but the software is known to make mistakes and the student denies using it.

How should responsibility be assigned when evidence is powerful but unreliable?

Explore this quandary