Talk:Napier shootings

This article was nominated for deletion on 5 May 2022. The result of the discussion was keep.

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on May 7, 2012, May 7, 2014, May 7, 2017, May 7, 2019, May 7, 2021, and May 7, 2022.

Cannabis Low‑importance

	Cannabis portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cannabis, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cannabis on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CannabisWikipedia:WikiProject CannabisTemplate:WikiProject CannabisCannabis articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Crime and Criminal Biography Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Death Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Law Enforcement Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Law Enforcement. Please Join, Create, and Assess.Law EnforcementWikipedia:WikiProject Law EnforcementTemplate:WikiProject Law EnforcementLaw enforcement articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

New Zealand Low‑importance

	New Zealand portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New Zealand, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New Zealand and New Zealand-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New ZealandWikipedia:WikiProject New ZealandTemplate:WikiProject New ZealandNew Zealand articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Current Event[edit]

This article needs expanding, now, and when new information comes to light. -- Danreilly123^(talk) 10:29, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not every dead police officer has an article about them... so why this guy? 98.151.195.132 (talk) 01:56, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I fully agree. I can think of a number of friends of mine that should have an article written about them since they were killed in the line of duty. And what about every law enforcement officer and firefighter that lost their life during the September 11, 2001 terrorist attack. They did things most people would not think about doing and running up burning buildings not thinking twice. If every one of these people are not added, then these people need to be removed. Sweet Pea 1981 (talk) 04:04, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This event is notable, there is substantial coverage on both major television networks[1][2], newspapers[3][4], radio[5], currently the lead story on the SMH in Australia[6]. The BBC[7] and the Washington Post[8] both have articles on it. I can suggest renaming the article to the event, 2009 Napier police shootings. XLerate (talk) 05:47, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move[edit]

The article should cover the event not the person, who is otherwise not notable. The event is clearly notable, Senior Constable Snee would not be other than for his tragic death. -- Mattinbgn\^talk 07:08, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support this article should redirect to 2009 Napier police shootings, not the other way around. Mattlore (talk) 07:35, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support and suggest that as these events are still ongoing (and it is possible that a criminal trial could be a result of these events) that editors be circumspect in what they write.Daveosaurus (talk) 08:09, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the article should be renamed to reflect the incident, rather than one of the people involved. I would suggest 2009 Napier siege or 2009 Napier shootings.-gadfium 08:15, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Now its mentioned, I have no idea why it needs to be "police shootings". One of gadfium's suggestions would probably be better. Mattlore (talk) 08:31, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Although Lenard Snee should remain, as section of the new article -- Danreilly123^(talk) 09:24, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support I agree that there should be an article on the 2009 Napier Armed Standoff —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.236.160.123 (talk) 09:31, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Moved. F (talk) 11:20, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Other police incidents with army support[edit]

Could someone please add links to other incidents where the military responded to a police situation? F (talk) 10:39, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The NZ Herald had a good section about military involvement in New Zealand police operations - [9]

"Every part of the Armed Forces that is assisting the Police... shall act at the request of the constable who is in charge of the operations in respect of the emergency,"

Re other incidents, in New Zealand the Stanley Graham article says army involvement, and a Defence Force UH-1 Iroquois took a couple of STG members on a reconnaissance flight at the Aramoana massacre. Constable Glenn Arthur McKibben was also shot by a former soldier.

The Dominion Post has an article as well: A first for use of army vehicles. XLerate (talk) 13:05, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Move?[edit]

This event in NZ was widely, if not only called the Napier siege. Should we move it to 2009 Napier siege? --SamB135^Talk_Contribs 04:48, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WP:Death Assessment Commentary[edit]

The article was assessed as Start-class, for lack of Coverage and Accessibility, particularly for these two reasons:

Coverage: "Molenaar continues to have supporters in Napier, particularly those impressed by his anti-gang stance"
- Did I miss something? What supporters? What anti-gang stance?
Accessibility: 'his tangi at Ruahapia marae and funeral were well attended"
- His what at what-what?

Boneyard90 (talk) 15:18, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Maori[edit]

The statement that "Molenaar, 51, was born of Ngāti Kahungunu extraction" will be very obscure to someone who is not from New Zealand. I suggest that this should be translated into standard English - such as "Molenaar, 51, was part Maori, descended from the Ngāti Kahungunu tribe".Royalcourtier (talk) 00:18, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Military experience[edit]

The statement that "In the 1980s he spent six years in the territorial armoured corps of the Hawke's Bay and Wellington Regiment" cannot be correct. The Hawke's Bay and Wellington Regiment was an infantry unit, with artillery and other support elements. It had no "armoured corps" elements. Furthermore the correct wording would be "In the 1980s he spent six years in the army territorial force, serving in the Hawke's Bay and Wellington Regiment".Royalcourtier (talk) 00:20, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Duration of siege[edit]

The siege did not last 40 hours. It lasted little more than 30 hours. The man then shot himself. But the police waited for almost another day before entering the house - for reasons which were never explained, but can be assumedRoyalcourtier (talk) 00:23, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Funerals and tangi?[edit]

The article seems to suggest that there were four funerals and tangi for the gunman. Surely there was only one?Royalcourtier (talk) 00:26, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Restraining order against house not possible[edit]

It is not possible that a "restraining order has been issued against the house the two lived in". There is no such thing as a restraining order against a house.Royalcourtier (talk) 00:27, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It is the term used in the sources [10], [11], [12]. It's presumably along the lines of a restraint order (as it exists in at least UK law) and which it appears is sometimes also called a restraining order. At the moment the wiki link is to the restraining order concept as a personal protection order, which is very probably misleading, so I've removed the link, and I've made it clearer that the order was against Keefe and in relation to her assets, which more closely matches the source "Justice Potter has today issued a restraining order in favour of the Solicitor-General over the house the couple lived in and more than $90,000 in cash and bank deposits." . Spokoyni (talk) 09:07, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]