 | A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on March 2, 2021. |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
Accuracy of this account questioned.
editAlthough far from being an expert I have read many accounts which suggest this is not an accurate account.To start with Volkner was not tried by any legal authority.Has was murdered by a figure in the hauhau cult-Te Rau-a violent Maori extremist who intimidated the local Maori in that area.This murderer then ate part of Volkner-his eyes .It seems that it was not only Volker who was giving information to the government anyway (something he was quite entitled,indeed bound to do, as a law abidding citizen.)
It seems the person who stirred up the Hau Hau was a young Roman Catholic Missionary in the same area who spread false rumours among the Maori about Volkner, as part of the quite widespread competion for souls between the Anglican and Catholic church. The govt found out about this and and the leading Catholic authority(Pompelier?) was spoken to on the quiet by the government.The Catholic church quietly removed the missionary and sent him to Australia. Later he returned to France.I believe this is an accurate account of what actully happened. I believe most of the sources are on line.Currently Waikato University is translating thousands of communications from the NZ Missionaries to France-already this has revealed detials of the intense,sometimes bitter competion between the 2 rival churches. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.153.154.179 (talk) 01:54, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
Merge
editI don't understand why the Völkner incident isn't merged with this article, they both share a considerable amount of common material and neither is long enough to necessitate a content fork. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 08:54, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose I don't understand why you would ever consider merging this. What happened as a consequence of this incident spans 150 years and goes way beyond what would be reasonable to be covered in a biography. If there's too much overlap, content from the bio ought to be moved to the other article. Schwede66 07:57, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose Absolutely don't see the need – if anything, the proposal would make (a little) more sense the other way around. To me, the fallout of this event clearly goes beyond what should reasonably be covered in Völkner's biography. AngryHarpytalk 09:04, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
- Comment He has an entry in the Dictionary of New Zealand Biography and we have consensus that people listed there have inherent notability. Schwede66 13:37, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
- Was unaware of this. To be clear, I didn't intend to imply that this proposal actually ought to be reversed, only that it would in my view have been a little more understandable. AngryHarpytalk 10:52, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
- Comment He has an entry in the Dictionary of New Zealand Biography and we have consensus that people listed there have inherent notability. Schwede66 13:37, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose I would merge other way around. Völkner's significance was that in the incident. - Geeett 21/3/2 @22:40 UTC
- Comment I've removed the tags from both articles as I don't see any potential for this discussion to go anywhere else from here. AngryHarpytalk 09:03, 22 March 2021 (UTC)