Yes, a a very important part of American history conveniently neglected to be mentioned. Is Wikipedia trying to suppress something? This is probably what the Fort is known for more so than what is listed in this article.BenW (talk) 01:04, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
A few years later now. There is some mention of the 1565 incident in the wikipedia article Matanzas River, which is linked from this article by the See also about etymology note. I for one am willing for this article to include some mention, too, but I am not sure whether the incident(s) happened at the site of this monument, and I think this monument as a historic place with historic artifacts is about the 1740 fort, etc. I doubt whether there are any historic artifacts of the French incident. Perhaps the incident(s) are best covered elsewhere in some history article, not in any article about a specific historic site.
Also, by the way, the NYT op ed piece suggests these French may have been pirates, too, raiding Spanish treasure ships, not merely innocent religious people.... --doncram 14:17, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
Fort Matanzas National Monument Headquarters and Visitor Center separate
In some edit summaries or comments elsewhere, I saw some suggestion that recently created Fort Matanzas National Monument Headquarters and Visitor Center should not be a separate article, could be covered within this National Monument article. I think it should be separate. The current coverage in this article is just right: a bare mention in one sentence plus a See Also link. It would be confusing to readers to give more, about the National Park Service rustic architecture etc., which is hugely secondary to the real history of the place. Happy to discuss as always, am suggesting here is the place to discuss if anyone is interested. --doncram 13:29, 24 October 2012 (UTC)